Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49990
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain jaury.eu from 84.102.91.132 cause and error)
To: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <4CCBB87F.7090209@codeangel.org>
References:
	 <vmime.4ccb830d.38c3.17e1875bd77d675d@zarafa.edigitalresearch.com>
	 <4CCBB87F.7090209@codeangel.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-KlRUwzbnV/QtjZAwHyzX"
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:28:06 +0200
Message-ID: <1288420086.2338.5.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] rename T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM to T_DOUBLE_COLON
From: pierre@jaury.eu (Pierre Jaury)

--=-KlRUwzbnV/QtjZAwHyzX
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

As you mention, PHP errors are token names. Users have to read the
manual to understand them at first sight. Then, what's the matter in
having a bit of fun and nostalgia naming the tokens ?

Switching to meanful error messages would make your point though.

Pierre.

Le samedi 30 octobre 2010 =C3=A0 01:17 -0500, Chad Emrys a =C3=A9crit :
> On 10/29/2010 09:29 PM, James Butler wrote:
> > I'll bite.
> >
> > Why should this be changed? Is it broken? Is it something that 1 second=
 on google can't answer?
> > If somebody is advanced enough to be using classes (I think about the o=
nly time you would use a double colon) then they should know what it means.
> >
> > --
> > James Butler
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On 30 Oct 2010, at 02:51, "Chad Emrys"<admin@codeangel.org>  wrote:
> >
> >   =20
> >
> The fact they have to google to figure out what it means, the error=20
> message fails at it's purpose. (Realistically it'll take longer than a=
=20
> second unless you got google hot keyed to your log reader).  I Liked=20
> Stefan's idea in the previous thread to not put token names in the error=
=20
> messages anymore and replace them with something more meaningful for the=
=20
> user.  However, since that never happened, this is a better/easier=20
> alternative for now.  How many total hours of googling will we save=20
> developers for a 10 sec grep and replace? (not sure if it's that easy,=
=20
> but for the sake of the argument).
>=20
> I can see only positives by switching it out.  can someone give me a=20
> light on how much it would actually cost to do that? Some negatives?  I=
=20
> don't see the argument given to be entirely helpful because it's exactly=
=20
> what I am trying to point out as a problem, and the reason why we should=
=20
> change it.
>=20


--=-KlRUwzbnV/QtjZAwHyzX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAABAgAGBQJMy7rzAAoJEDSQCHL8ONzABzMH/RNPRBoDB8w1QI6RsMGuDBFw
DeWkh0r5ZD/wwv3bcAfCLiERawVLOYCpkfGQitQ6Jws2C1iGH7hkaVBUmeSB2X9z
+gdx1fFzBV0/PE06qbcSPw4xgLNZrfCUXbPRnbnU/p1+txjtuf8nhquwyjAjpVZY
wqAK74lO5eHNB56w4F/sfFqUb4iVuHo+V3k9VDNyMCQvSwpuTLdM1xdbwi9DdrVK
bLNim8v0MNR7i03owO1CxR6Efqh+Jff+G2jt+gdLtmtYbX8eW2El0Ao3MqKLSmv2
p8tknUgd/XDXNWYkQHmJbT9gqQ2OaXqH1LpL+hFfoO5maNSAictK1HRwn5vkf7g=
=UM/Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-KlRUwzbnV/QtjZAwHyzX--