Type declarations in child as well as parent?

[NotionCommotion]

If calling a parents constructor, it is considered better practice to duplicate the type declarations or just use them in the parent?  Originally, I was doing for both, but it gets a bit cumbersome sometimes, and thinking of changing.  Thanks

 

namespace Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo;
class FooClass
{
    protected $mapper, $validator, $pdo, $properties;

    public function __construct(
        Mapper\MapperClass $mapper,
        Validator\ValidatorClass $validator,
        \PDO $pdo,
        array $properties
    ) {
        $this->mapper=$mapper;
        $this->validator=$validator;
        $this->pdo=$pdo;
        $this->properties=$properties;
    }
}

Option 1

namespace Base\SpecificFoo;
class SpecificFooClassx extends \Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo\FooClass
{
    protected $bar;

    public function __construct(
        Bar\BarClass $bar,
        $mapper,
        $validator,
        $pdo,
        $properties
    ) {
        $this->bar=$bar;
        parent::__construct($mapper, $validator, $pdo, $properties);
    }
}

Option 2

namespace Base\SpecificFoo;
class SpecificFooClass extends \Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo\FooClass
{
    public function __construct(
        Bar\BarClass $bar,
        \Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo\FooClass\Mapper\MapperClass $mapper,
        \Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo\FooClass\Validator\ValidatorClass $validator,
        \PDO $pdo,
        array $properties
    ) {
        $this->bar=$bar;
        parent::__construct($mapper, $validator, $pdo, $properties);
    }
}

 

[requinix]

Duplicate them. Leaving them off is such an incorrect decision to me that I don't even have a clever way to answer your question.

The types mean something. They aren't arbitrary. Writing those huge long class names is ridiculous, of course, but that's why PHP has the "use" keyword.

use Base\Bla\BlaBla\Foo as Foo;

class SpecificFooClass extends Foo\FooClass {