PHP
downloads | documentation | faq | getting help | mailing lists | licenses | wiki | reporting bugs | php.net sites | links | conferences | my php.net

search for in the

Namespaces> <Late Static Bindings
Last updated: Fri, 10 Jul 2009

view this page in

Objects and references

One of the key-points of PHP5 OOP that is often mentioned is that "objects are passed by references by default". This is not completely true. This section rectifies that general thought using some examples.

A PHP reference is an alias, which allows two different variables to write to the same value. As of PHP5, an object variable doesn't contain the object itself as value anymore. It only contains an object identifier which allows object accessors to find the actual object. When an object is sent by argument, returned or assigned to another variable, the different variables are not aliases: they hold a copy of the identifier, which points to the same object.

Example #1 References and Objects

<?php
class {
    public 
$foo 1;
}  

$a = new A;
$b $a;     // $a and $b are copies of the same identifier
             // ($a) = ($b) = <id>
$b->foo 2;
echo 
$a->foo."\n";


$c = new A;
$d = &$c;    // $c and $d are references
             // ($c,$d) = <id>

$d->foo 2;
echo 
$c->foo."\n";


$e = new A;

function 
foo($obj) {
    
// ($obj) = ($e) = <id>
    
$obj->foo 2;
}

foo($e);
echo 
$e->foo."\n";

?>

The above example will output:

2
2
2


Namespaces> <Late Static Bindings
Last updated: Fri, 10 Jul 2009
 
add a note add a note User Contributed Notes
Objects and references
Aaron Bond
20-Jun-2009 01:08
I've bumped into a behavior that helped clarify the difference between objects and identifiers for me.

When we hand off an object variable, we get an identifier to that object's value.  This means that if I were to mutate the object from a passed variable, ALL variables originating from that instance of the object will change. 

HOWEVER, if I set that object variable to new instance, it replaces the identifier itself with a new identifier and leaves the old instance in tact.

Take the following example:

<?php
class A {
    public
$foo = 1;


class
B {
    public function
foo(A $bar)
    {
       
$bar->foo = 42;
    }
   
    public function
bar(A $bar)
    {
       
$bar = new A;
    }
}

$f = new A;
$g = new B;
echo
$f->foo . "\n";

$g->foo($f);
echo
$f->foo . "\n";

$g->bar($f);
echo
$f->foo . "\n";

?>

If object variables were always references, we'd expect the following output:
1
42
1

However, we get:
1
42
42

The reason for this is simple.  In the bar function of the B class, we replace the identifier you passed in, which identified the same instance of the A class as your $f variable, with a brand new A class identifier.  Creating a new instance of A doesn't mutate $f because $f wasn't passed as a reference.

To get the reference behavior, one would have to enter the following for class B:

<?php
class B {
    public function
foo(A $bar)
    {
       
$bar->foo = 42;
    }
   
    public function
bar(A &$bar)
    {
       
$bar = new A;
    }
}
?>

The foo function doesn't require a reference, because it is MUTATING an object instance that $bar identifies.  But bar will be REPLACING the object instance.  If only an identifier is passed, the variable identifier will be overwritten but the object instance will be left in place.
Ivan Bertona
15-Oct-2008 03:45
A point that in my opinion is not stressed enough in the manual page is that in PHP5, passing an object as an argument of a function call with no use of the & operator means passing BY VALUE an unique identifier for that object (intended as instance of a class), which will be stored in another variable that has function scope.

This behaviour is the same used in Java, where indeed there is no notion of passing arguments by reference. On the other hand, in PHP you can pass a value by reference (in PHP we refer to references as "aliases"), and this poses a threat if you are not aware of what you are really doing. Please consider these two classes:

<?php
class A
{
    function
__toString() {
        return
"Class A";
    }
}
   
class
B
{
    function
__toString() {
        return
"Class B";
    }
}
?>

In the first test case we make two objects out of the classes A and B, then swap the variables using a temp one and the normal assignment operator (=).

<?php
$a
= new A();
$b = new B();
   
$temp = $a;
$a = $b;
$b = $temp;
   
print(
'$a: ' . $a . "\n");
print(
'$b: ' . $b . "\n");
?>

As expected the script will output:

$a: Class B
$b: Class A

Now consider the following snippet. It is similar to the former but the assignment $a = &$b makes $a an ALIAS of $b.

<?php
$a
= new A();
$b = new B();
   
$temp = $a;
$a = &$b;
$b = $temp;
   
print(
'$a: ' . $a . "\n");
print(
'$b: ' . $b . "\n");
?>

This script will output:

$a: Class A
$b: Class A

That is, modifying $b reflects the same assignment on $a... The two variables end pointing to the same object, and the other one is lost. To sum up is a good practice NOT using aliasing when handling PHP5 objects, unless your are really really sure of what you are doing.
lazybones_senior
01-Oct-2008 01:57
WHOA... KEEP IT SIMPLE!

In regards to secure_admin's note: You've used OOP to simplify PHP's ability to create and use object references. Now use PHP's static keyword to simplify your OOP.

<?php

class DataModelControl {
  protected static
$data = 256; // default value;
 
protected $name;

  public function
__construct($dmcName) {
   
$this->name = $dmcName;
  }

  public static function
setData($dmcData) {
    if(
is_numeric($dmcData)) {
     
self::$data = $dmcData;
    }
  }

  public function
__toString() {
    return
"DataModelControl [name=$this->name, data=" . self::$data . "]";
  }  
}

# create several instances of DataModelControl...
$dmc1 = new DataModelControl('dmc1');
$dmc2 = new DataModelControl('dmc2');
$dmc3 = new DataModelControl('dmc3');
echo
$dmc1 . '<br>';
echo
$dmc2 . '<br>';
echo
$dmc3 . '<br><br>';

# To change data, use any DataModelControl object...
$dmc2->setData(512);
# Or, call setData() directly from the class...
DataModelControl::setData(1024);
echo
$dmc1 . '<br>';
echo
$dmc2 . '<br>';
echo
$dmc3 . '<br><br>';
?>

 DataModelControl [name=dmc1, data=256]
 DataModelControl [name=dmc2, data=256]
 DataModelControl [name=dmc3, data=256]

 DataModelControl [name=dmc1, data=1024]
 DataModelControl [name=dmc2, data=1024]
 DataModelControl [name=dmc3, data=1024]

... even better! Now, PHP creates one copy of $data, that is shared amongst all DataModelControl objects.
secure_admin
30-Sep-2008 11:38
USE OOP to ACCESS OBJECT REFERENCES

The PHP language itself offers a slew of nifty operators that can copy, clone, and alias objects and references in many ways. But that kind of syntax looks rather fearsome. Here, I use OOP to get the same results, but with cleaner and more practical code. Below, one DataModel object is instantiated so that many instances of DataControl can use and alter it. Regardless of how PHP works, the OOP styled setup keeps all DataControl instances "on the same page" because they are all looking at the "same model" - which this code clearly shows.

<?php

class DataModel {
  protected
$name, $data;

  public function
__construct($dmName, $dmData) {
   
$this->name = $dmName;
   
$this->setData($dmData);
  }

  public function
setData($dmData) {
    if(
is_numeric($dmData)) {
     
$this->data = $dmData;
    }
  }

  public function
__toString() {
    return
"DataModel [name=$this->name, data=$this->data]";
  }  
}

class
DataControl {
  protected
$name, $model;

  public function
__construct($dcName, $dcModel) {
   
$this->name = $dcName;
   
$this->model = $dcModel;
  }

  public function
setData($dmData) {
   
$this->model->setData($dmData);
  }

  public function
__toString() {
    return
"DataController [name=$this->name, model=" . $this->model->__toString() . "]";
  }
}

# create one instance of DataModel...
$model = new DataModel('dm1', 128);
echo
$model . '<br><br>';

# create several instances of DataControl, passing $model to each one...
$dc1 = new DataControl('dc1', $model);
$dc2 = new DataControl('dc2', $model);
$dc3 = new DataControl('dc3', $model);
echo
$dc1 . '<br>';
echo
$dc2 . '<br>';
echo
$dc3 . '<br><br>';

# To change data, use any $dataControl->setData()...
$dc3->setData(512);

echo
$dc1 . '<br>';
echo
$dc2 . '<br>';
echo
$dc3 . '<br><br>';

?>
* * * output * * *
DataModel [name=dm1, data=128]

DataController [name=dc1, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=128]]
DataController [name=dc2, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=128]]
DataController [name=dc3, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=128]]

DataController [name=dc1, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=512]]
DataController [name=dc2, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=512]]
DataController [name=dc3, model=DataModel [name=dm1, data=512]]
wbcarts at juno dot com
30-Sep-2008 08:23
A BIT DILUTED... but it's alright!

In the PHP example above, the function foo($obj), will actually create a $foo property to "any object" passed to it - which brings some confusion to me:
  $obj = new stdClass();
  foo($obj);    // tags on a $foo property to the object
                // why is this method here?
Furthermore, in OOP, it is not a good idea for "global functions" to operate on an object's properties... and it is not a good idea for your class objects to let them. To illustrate the point, the example should be:

<?php

class A {
  protected
$foo = 1;

  public function
getFoo() {
    return
$this->foo;
  }

  public function
setFoo($val) {
    if(
$val > 0 && $val < 10) {
     
$this->foo = $val;
    }
  }

  public function
__toString() {
    return
"A [foo=$this->foo]";
  }
}

$a = new A();
$b = $a;                        // $a and $b are copies of the same identifier
                                // ($a) = ($b) = <id>
$b->setFoo(2);
echo
$a->getFoo() . '<br>';

$c = new A();
$d = &$c;                       // $c and $d are references
                                // ($c,$d) = <id>
$d->setFoo(2);
echo
$c . '<br>';

$e = new A();
$e->setFoo(16);                 // will be ignored
echo $e;

?>
- - -
 2
 A [foo=2]
 A [foo=1]
 - - -
Because the global function foo() has been deleted, class A is more defined, robust and will handle all foo operations... and only for objects of type A. I can now take it for granted and see clearly that your are talking about "A" objects and their references. But it still reminds me too much of cloning and object comparisons, which to me borders on machine-like programming and not object-oriented programming, which is a totally different way to think.

Namespaces> <Late Static Bindings
Last updated: Fri, 10 Jul 2009
 
 
show source | credits | stats | sitemap | contact | advertising | mirror sites