CODEWITHSUNDEEP
phpoopinheritanceextendslate-static-binding
Stephan-v
Stephan-v

Reputation: 20369

Difference between these two OOP scenarios?

I am confused what the difference or the performance gain would be between these 2 scenario's. Why would one be chosen over the other?

Parent class: 

class exampleB
{
    public function __construct($arg1, $arg2)
    {
        // Do something with the arguments.
    }
}

Child class A 

class exampleA extends exampleB
{
    public function make($arg1, $arg2)
    {
        parent::__construct($arg1, $arg2);
    }
}

Running the first example:

$exampleA = new exampleA();
$exampleA->make('arg1', 'arg2');

The second example would be:

Child class A

class exampleA extends exampleB
{
    public static function make($arg1, $arg2)
    {
        return new static($arg1, $arg2);
    }
}

Running the second example:

exampleA::make('arg1', 'arg2');

Could somebody tell me the advantages and/or disadvantages between these 2 scenarios? The reason I have these example because I do not want to override the constructor of my parent class.

Upvotes: 0

Views: 59

Answers (2)

PeeHaa
PeeHaa

Reputation: 72729

You should do neither and use the constructor to initialize the object. The object must be in a valid state after construction.

The reason I have these example because I do not want to override the constructor of my parent class.

Then simply just don't define the constructor in the child class.

class Parent {
    public function __construct() {
        echo 'parent ctor called';
    }
}

class Child extends Parent {}

new Child(); // echo's parent ctor called

Upvotes: 2

Markus Müller
Markus Müller

Reputation: 2641

I would opt for the second example. Make() acts like a constructor and thus should be called like one, i.e. static.

In the first example you create two objects instead of one. This might create some confusion when other devs read / mantain your code.

Upvotes: -1

Related Questions