Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84301 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 13496 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2015 19:09:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Mar 2015 19:09:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=larry@garfieldtech.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=larry@garfieldtech.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain garfieldtech.com from 66.111.4.26 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: larry@garfieldtech.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.111.4.26 out2-smtp.messagingengine.com Received: from [66.111.4.26] ([66.111.4.26:36853] helo=out2-smtp.messagingengine.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 6F/F7-56703-35857F45 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2015 14:09:08 -0500 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C2F520884 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:09:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 04 Mar 2015 14:09:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=x-sasl-enc:message-id:date:from :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=YQh16etPLS+RAtBONvbzLO 0+A1c=; b=dMhWcKFKTY8PqB4S2qvVgO/BnJyB+5B9jUT3i3nvlIcc8Iv9ennKi+ MTUzY6rn+Oi4JiP31Ux5ca4BHUCUphSTSGDSz68m8qitIW1oVRAFKtAIpMK8arNg ndRV+b+q7ThG7LcTxTm+NzFLStSBdHDUNJaz2EZdVbEvWBdEtqlsg= X-Sasl-enc: RJ2kEahdOLJ8zjIv+LmlFSoZQwzOVIRsuNf605XMLbmK 1425496145 Received: from Palantirs-MacBook-Pro-7.local (unknown [63.250.249.138]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 287B86800C0 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:09:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <54F75850.2020104@garfieldtech.com> Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 13:09:04 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <54F4E29D.7080501@garfieldtech.com> <54F4E93C.80206@gmail.com> <54F4EBEC.2090702@garfieldtech.com> <54F4F3FC.6060501@fischer.name> <54F4FDFB.8010701@lsces.co.uk> <54F5895D.3090002@gmail.com> <554F0C3F-770F-4694-A5AB-FDC54FCCBF00@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Consistent function names From: larry@garfieldtech.com (Larry Garfield) On 3/3/15 6:46 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Whether we like it or not, people evaluate languages by matrix like > > PHP Ruby Python > OO support 5 5 5 > Flexible syntax 3 5 5 > AOP support 3 3 3 > DbC 1 2 2 > API consistency 1 3 3 > API richness 4 4 4 > 3rd Party Libs 4 4 4 > Performance 4 3 3 > Security 1 4 4 > Type Safety 1 4 3 > > Although this is rough evaluation by me, people would have somewhat similar > matrix. > > API consistency 1 3 3 And if you add in "dozens of functions have 2 names that do the same thing for 'historical reasons'", that 1 is going to go down to a 0.5, not up. It would be just one more thing for the Ruby biggots to poke fun at PHP for, not something that would quiet them down. I know you feel strongly about this, but you're not the first. It's counter-productive and won't even address the marketing issue you note. --Larry Garfield