Improvement of chapter "Výrazové prostředky" - updated version #1065
+6,686
−4,882
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…][Closes nette#1025][Closes nette#1019][Closes nette#1016][Closes nette#1015]
The term 'výrazové prostředky' is correct, but common developer understands the word "syntaktické prvky" better. I also suggest reordering the items + complete missing description about public properties and explicite note the slight syntax difference between constant and property.
dg
force-pushed
the
master
branch
4 times, most recently
from
d08bd2a
to
cfaa617
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The term 'výrazové prostředky' is correct, but common developer understands the word "syntaktické prvky" better. I also suggest reordering the items + complete missing description about public properties and explicite note the slight syntax difference between constant and property.
I was very confused by that fact, that approx. 3 years ago the syntax for public properties @myservice::publicProperty was not supported and the only supported syntax at that time was funny: @myservice::$publicProperty() so I have it in my services.neon. Another source of confusion is neon plugin of @mesour which suggests public properties with $ on the beginning.
When I tested yesterday the syntax @myservice::publicProperty I made first letter uppercase @myservice::PublicProperty and got exception that constant not exist. I see that the difference in syntax between constant and property is very slight - first letter uppercase/lowercase. I think its goodidea, but I see important point out this slight difference in documentation as well.
The syntax of public properties is also discussed here on forum: https://forum.nette.org/cs/36714-rfc-upravit-matouci-syntaxi-public-property-sluzby-v-services-neon