Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20232
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
	s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=uHdjhr6QkR/j/zoIpxBmJKfjvG003XEuUNaqcXHyoz52JQW1kNvJL6rPJpyJRJHp9FHE7BGrC3OwSjdU3HOorNWEyC2COCWAe1NzmG0HOJiZ1bksqBdvERTddcCV62wctynJ69uwFgWbqbhkCFOoDL/tXvmsKzDU6F/G1sW0D5o=
Message-ID: <497935ba0511220159y14dc36cra39e28d7d617a03b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:29:51 +1030
To: Robert Deaton <false.hopes@gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <a491f91d0511220030l734cda4t11f649295d3f2c81@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3F.25.11378.CEA42834@pb1.pair.com>
	<018d01c5eeec$23949600$5c8be5a9@ohr.berkeley.edu>
	<497935ba0511211511l5867410dk577deb60b998a069@mail.gmail.com>
	<497935ba0511211512k4c8e1cb4r89cf1ffcd4ab7829@mail.gmail.com>
	<438254E6.2050903@prohost.org>
	<497935ba0511211609n675a3c3yf03cb5e5e97bb5bf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4382BDA2.4050806@php.net>
	<497935ba0511220024l492112f7nfe2c05d27d65e1a5@mail.gmail.com>
	<497935ba0511220024j4a189b94r667945241f1811f8@mail.gmail.com>
	<a491f91d0511220030l734cda4t11f649295d3f2c81@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Syntax in PHP 6
From: rowanjl@gmail.com (Rowan Lewis)

Well no, I guess you don't want to, but then do you want to keep
adding new features following no specific naming method? Users I know
of already complain about the lack of standard naming throughout PHP.

As there are already alot of changes in PHP6, would it really hurt
more to change to one standard naming system? Would it be better for
the future?

You're worried about conforming to a single naming standard, and that
it might put old users off. At the same time, your looking at
introducing many other features, like namespaces, which many people
hate.

No body I know of (assuming that they are sane) would complain if a
standard naming system was adopted. Most of them would feel that the
quality of the language has just been given a large boost.

I won't sit here and take the "running away from the language",
knowing that bigger more confusing and perhaps less useful changes
will be implemented.

To everyone taking part in PHP6 development, thanks for the work, just
don't let the users down.

And to everyone who has worked on PHP, thank you for giving me a
simple OOP capable language!

On 11/22/05, Robert Deaton <false.hopes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/22/05, Rowan Lewis <rowanjl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, this is all OK. I guess, even if it means PHP will remain messy
> > for more years yet.
> >
> > But can someone point me as to why this (backwards) choice has been mad=
e?
> >
> The current function naming scheme being messy is really a subject of
> personal opinion. I personally think that if it comes to a point where
> all the functions are replaced with ones like you outlined above, I'd
> be running away from the language.
>
> Not to mention backwards compatability, do we really want to piss off
> every person that has coded in PHP over the last few years?
>
> --
> --Robert Deaton
>


--
____
Rowan Lewis (AKA. The Wolf)