My replies are bolded just for readability, not emphasis.
First lets look at handlers, he wanted to know if it was possible that if the handler was in the external handler, could that be called over the standard handler. This has more merit, because it allows for core handlers to work, and if there is one in the external location then that is used instead.
I don’t see how that is a merit. You just describe the exact benefits of the way I do it as well (using the defined behavior of the framework) I believe that both of us are able to have “core” handlers that are overridden as necessary. I just don’t have to hack the framework to do so. Can you help me understand a specific merit that is unique to reversing the lookup order to help me understand justifying it?
I didn’t do this much with handlers myself, as I didn’t see a huge or great need for it. But I did use it on the odd occasion, and like any good OOP I could extend the standard location from the external to provide the missing pieces without falling to the DRY problems that can happen.
Again, I am able to accomplish this same behavior by having a local handler that extends the external one. This is not a merit unique to reversing the lookup order.
I might be wrong, but I believe this is the approach and method he is trying to tackle. Like I did around 3 or so years ago.
I don’t think there is any question as to how he is trying to do it. My questions are why he is choosing to work against the framework. I am open to anything if it has a benefit which is why I am trying to understand what is better about that approach.