Hi
Dne Tue, 22 May 2012 22:37:47 +0530
Chanaka Dharmarathna <pe.chanaka.ck(a)gmail.com> napsal(a):
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Rouslan Placella
<rouslan(a)placella.com>wrote;wrote:
> BTW, what about extending our existing PMA_Table class? I'm not sure how
> good of an idea it is, so I'm just throwing it out there...
I don't think this would be useful, this class should care less about
table (actually should be table independent) and more oriented on
displaying results.
Thanks for participating to this discussion and share
your valuable
suggestions.
As I remember Michal has already suggested to not to use an object of this
case.
And use PMA_Display::someFunction where needed.
Thats why I focused on static fields and behaviors.
Well it was just a naming condition, you should really make that
object, get parameters in constructor. So basically Rouslans example is
what I would expect.
The constructor of the function only executed, if
create an object of a
class. (I think your code trying to say create an object, new keyword is
missing there).
So I don't think to get the use of a constructor. That's why I'm using a
function for initialize instance variables.
I'm agreed to use more meaningful name. It is better if we can name it as
PMA_DisplayTable .
PMA_DisplayResults might be better. Please remember this should not be
about displaying tables but results of any SQL query - results of
stored procedure, browsing SQL processes or displaying binary log.
--
Michal Čihař |
http://cihar.com |
http://blog.cihar.com