Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50667 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 73413 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2010 17:15:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Nov 2010 17:15:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=keisial@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=keisial@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: keisial@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.54 mail-ww0-f54.google.com Received: from [74.125.82.54] ([74.125.82.54:51287] helo=mail-ww0-f54.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 09/00-07352-13E82FC4 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 12:15:29 -0500 Received: by wwb31 with SMTP id 31so2124503wwb.11 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 09:15:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kItnjsv+z/3dv7yKdpa4YTEGyrn+0f1iS+jND6clTAQ=; b=w6Czf3hU8PnbQoMgZv/pBCnLxzbO+b/6eaA8PwoTfofwMPntBcRUIfi04O4sR3GhaJ 2qD03/Yc3HliGiS4MuDvNoADwvsjJ/4/pZBhosANi0/gi02ZG7FXgPBSZS1B3VA9s64r k/Her+0aHUZHO9PU1YdUSliGewxdsapMado3Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=erO7zh/NW9Iz+KZZJF2ONbzMfxwwwdUQceUF+sCd8Iv+5VycXWSsXEORiJZHO4WPDB RwprVrSf958UxrMa+fld9lAMgzahtPgW0T7fPDkLT9VZflcspF9ZCHDZXLWcPcZhCIRO hkVeST5i0USg5wtH4xH/TWYVK3bfbNgyp9Nps= Received: by 10.216.78.143 with SMTP id g15mr1766694wee.31.1290964192399; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 09:09:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.26] (168.Red-83-49-114.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.49.114.168]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k4sm1953834weq.33.2010.11.28.09.09.50 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 28 Nov 2010 09:09:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CF28CFC.2060204@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:10:20 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dallas Gutauckis CC: internals@lists.php.net References: <1290879624.7033.826.camel@guybrush> <4CF27AAC.9010704@divbyzero.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Making T_FUNCTION optional in method declarations From: keisial@gmail.com ("=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1ngel_Gonz=E1lez?=") Dallas Gutauckis wrote: > Just to be clear, this works on the assumption that we don't know the class > name that the function resides in? > > I understand the search argument, but to me it only applies to functions, > not methods. Is anyone arguing for removing the T_FUNCTION requirement on > functions? Even knowing the class you are calling, and assuming the common convention of one file per class, you may not know in which file is it implemented. It's annoying to go into the class, find out it's not there, grep the parent class, and having to repeat the process three or four levels up. Whereas with a unique enough name, grepping the functions get all the possible implementations. Plus, it's not always easy to know in which class to look something :-) function baz( $param ) { $param->morlocks(); }