Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84335 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 23089 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2015 11:46:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Mar 2015 11:46:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:41006] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DA/A0-18504-B0248F45 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2015 06:46:20 -0500 Received: (qmail 21078 invoked by uid 89); 5 Mar 2015 11:46:16 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 21072, pid: 21075, t: 0.0817s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@86.189.147.37) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 5 Mar 2015 11:46:16 -0000 Message-ID: <54F84208.4020709@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:46:16 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <726CA870-917C-4270-A129-AFE106E0A380@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <726CA870-917C-4270-A129-AFE106E0A380@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Consistent Function Names From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 05/03/15 09:40, Rowan Collins wrote: >> > >> >Good point! >> >I'll update documents so that main function is prefered name/function >> >to be >> >used. > This would be fine if all the users read the manual, and only the manual. What about the thousands of books, tutorials, blog posts, Stack Overflow q&as, etc, all mentioning the names and behaviour that have been around for 15 to 20 years? Not to mention the thousands of lines of existing code which people will not only need to read and understand, but also contribute to without accidentally breaking compatibility with old versions of PHP. This is perhaps the key ... Yasuo has at least now come on board over the IEEE standards but has also spotted that because of allowing a little to much freedom in the past some of the current guide lines do not marry with the well established standards :( The bit I'm still unsure of here is not so much messing with some of the fine detail of the procedural based functions, but the coding standard that ACTUALLY applies at the object level. Using one naming standard for ths area and a different one for an object version of the same set of functions is equally confusing? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk