Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71714 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 95681 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2014 08:35:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2014 08:35:21 -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 67.192.241.193 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.193 smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.193] ([67.192.241.193:53892] helo=smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 88/10-28363-84DB8E25 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 03:35:21 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id A62693C8E10; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 03:35:18 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 5532C3C817E; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 03:35:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <52E8BD45.8030901@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:35:17 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pierre Joye , PHP internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] some thoughts about php 6 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > - Case sensitivity > . Even with ini setting, which will be most likely system wild, will > bring a major breakage for almost every single app out there. I do not > see any gain to do it. I would definitely not want to see any ini settings. There should not be ini settings that change language semantics, it'd be a nightmare to maintain and trying to write supported reqs for an app would look like whole page of settings eventually if we do it. With that, I don't think it'd break every single app - many apps actually now, thanks to modern IDEs, are pretty consistent with names, and most problems can be figured out by a tool. But I agree that such things should not be a top priority. There are many things that would have much better impact on much broader category of developers than fixing small annoyance with a change having huge price tag (the same goes for renaming functions, etc.). -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227