Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65514 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 32496 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2013 18:16:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Jan 2013 18:16:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.133 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.133 smtp133.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.133] ([67.192.241.133:54755] helo=smtp133.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id EA/57-09318-69369015 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:16:55 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp13.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 186ED3D047D; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:16:51 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp13.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id AAFB03D0490; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:16:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <51096387.3030909@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:16:39 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ferenc Kovacs CC: hakre , "internals@lists.php.net" References: <1359498582.20362.YahooMailNeo@web133002.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <51085497.3090504@sugarcrm.com> <1359560655.44471.YahooMailNeo@web133004.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] echo new SplFileObject(__FILE__); From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > But this isn't that strong of an argument, and I think that following > what SplFileInfo does would be more sensible (echoing the filename), but > I'm not sure change would worth breaking BC for. I don't see why it would be more sensible. It's different objects that do different things - Info represents file name, more or less, while Object represents file contents. I see no reason why it would only make sense for Object to return filename, or why we should "fix" something that is not broken. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227