[eluser]Knitter[/eluser]
Quote:Is there a reason you don’t want to include your classes via simple include()?
Maybe I'm just lazy, but it becomes cumbersome to manually manage all includes if they are scattered around the code, on single place to manage them, preferably if done automatically, would be better, it's what I've gotten used to and it feels I'm regressing instead of progressing, why should I do something manually, and that can be error prone, if I can create a method that will do that for me?
Quote:Here is my simplified MY_Controller.php
It's basically what I have and it kind of illustrates what I wanted to say, if I'm not mistaken, the MY_Controller is in the libraries folder, yet it is a controller and should be where all controllers are, if you name it otherwise, it will not be loaded by CI or at least will not work correctly, you can't have
Code:
XPTO extends Controller
and
, you must always have
Code:
MY_Controller extends Controller
and
Code:
XPTO2 extends MY_Controller
, or am I wrong?
Quote:I have no problem with putting these in the ‘libraries’ folder. By definition, they fit the bill.
I have, has they don't fit the bill. The ContactManager class is model, it contains a linked list of Person objects that are model, each Person contains a Contact that is model but I cannot let CI manage them or it will try to load what it can possibly know how. Toolbar is model, but must not extend from Model, Menu is model but most no extend from Model, they all need to be manually managed by me. Files manually included, some are in the libraries folder, some are in the models folder, yet they all should be considered model, they are the application. They have no view to show their contents, nor a controller as they need none, yet the provide all the functionality of my application, nevertheless CI forces me to separate them in a way that is not natural, considering the problem's domain.
Quote:Your Java MVC framework doesn’t require you to extend a framework base class?
Did I say Java doesn't require me to extend the framework? Of course you can and sometimes need to extend it, but not for the simplest of things, and not in the same way I'm being forced, and the keyword here is 'forced', to do. I can create a all application without extending a base class from Java, I do, however, use the base classes, a big difference there.
Quote:No languages support multiple inheritance.
I would have to disagree there, but that is another topic.
Quote:Everything is in TFM + common sense/intuition + experience.
You added experience there, as I mentioned I have none with CI, and common sense and intuition are really based on experience, the one I have contradicts what I'm seeing here, so that may be the source of all my confusions
.
Quote:Isn’t it great to be a computer science wiz?
It was great when time was free, now, time is money, or at least is not as free and abundant as before. Of course I can change the framework to suite my needs, but can is that really the correct path?
