Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 11617 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2022 12:48:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 20 Jun 2022 12:48:14 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E9E5180538 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:37:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-il1-f173.google.com (mail-il1-f173.google.com [209.85.166.173]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:37:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-f173.google.com with SMTP id 9so4119923ill.5 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:37:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7MMGGO1wsDOZ3Q1AhBMp/RPcLDN2hNm2nMeN254e6QU=; b=Cq9QHfCLbQf+6FNxuxKympnU1BsB41SyQUVFNAYoA6QfFLTwwxqUZEZUFwuNgnLX0c WmVN+X8tKduK3szQoT2KWuM4DtMWn9yJDCg2exi7fdS+G473h7bwFptFUZWmnIy8ozZl G3jy8P6UJiZNtr4Bk4wHun7Gz6eqHB7hiWatKURWwUVhKls/jUpdEbK5aY/RsKldKUHm dkUPs4KNZsKOolj2a2r+Dag2ByeuHVWMbjlwo3nhausPR4tY0eqef35NZAllGOO8gBsq n9UVQxMW9bzy9iNRi+0BRE520w3f2NMYwnH15+y0JyaIfRpBF/TdUJWw8GqI1R267lpy cSEg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7MMGGO1wsDOZ3Q1AhBMp/RPcLDN2hNm2nMeN254e6QU=; b=tnPjZcnoIJcbL4rOyOByjE3d+fp/RrVzo88YViI7DsDkPg66yxJAhyupFu2A3EG+Co R/dpln7bGPQU8pNAwW9kTdRJHqZFX+mZgVvvqejWZdeNZD9ZbIHd5HvKo2rovHglx47c KiSxn8gUuOuhuaN1UmdEWcv9xEoIYV6JjMlNiQsERJNwK56rj5NUhbX2iW9KXdKSC7eP LlAZLedYxXiEZjU8cJ1EpZL8Vgd3luMJZFe5fYvYwYIY3zDwG7JcS8klmPIGWSKla/Cz YSbwQhze+yZKvMHnw58Qik155VYTBp3aBJn83/3kOniBe+XLho/5NXwX/DA1W1ZHXJ33 OXLg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora9NZjILW2c6jFKk6SbfqrAMSJBtxECdwPHArNjKFYKvrQPiw73u r9h+ZAnAOjN8MoFpQuebv+kCC0DF2KqfttEVjEc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tQ3QsjKQ/9jciih5E6JnFBXUSTLocNvTrw6MnkcX/bvOHRR5Y6mUWPVAtSOwabrLp7ElNqFIOyeqFU71DRR0E= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:19ca:b0:2d3:9f45:6b9a with SMTP id r10-20020a056e0219ca00b002d39f456b9amr13343918ill.293.1655735835110; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:37:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2022 16:36:49 +0200 Message-ID: To: Guilliam Xavier Cc: Go Kudo , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004b313d05e1e20a35" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Under Discussion] Random Extension Improvement From: kjarli@gmail.com (Lynn) --0000000000004b313d05e1e20a35 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 3:15 PM Guilliam Xavier wrote: > Hi, > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/random_extension_improvement > > Thanks, but I am not sure about your argument in "Classnames are not > canonicalized": does "PHP applies strict PascalCase to class names" > (which remains to be proved) really imply to rename *acronyms* (e.g. > "CombinedLCG" to "CombinedLcg")? especially given existing classes > like "SimpleXMLElement" (not "SimpleXmlElement"), and that the > accepted "Class Naming" RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/class-naming) > voted for "PascalCase except Acronyms" (not "Always PascalCase") -- > excerpts: > Not specifically directed at this discussion, but perhaps this needs a revision. HTTPStatus is much harder to read for me than HttpStatus and it's unclear where the boundary of an acronym starts or stops. If anyone ever decides to make an RFC for this, you have my vote. These Acronyms are treated as words and thus should follow the same naming convention. If they shouldn't be treated as words, write their full name: HypertextTransferProtocolStatus. --0000000000004b313d05e1e20a35--