Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:99265 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37629 invoked from network); 30 May 2017 13:58:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 May 2017 13:58:34 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:47484] helo=xdebug.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FA/A1-34073-98A7D295 for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 09:58:33 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98CF910C6D2; Tue, 30 May 2017 14:58:30 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 14:58:30 +0100 (BST) X-X-Sender: derick@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl To: Tony Marston cc: internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <9dffe898-e550-c6d6-46bd-86dcf74735ea@fleshgrinder.com> <84.AD.34073.59B2D295@pb1.pair.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Class Naming in Core From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) On Tue, 30 May 2017, Tony Marston wrote: > "Rowan Collins" wrote in message news:DC66F890-A033-4EFA-8F2B-CB365C8A4FAC@gmail.com... > > > > On 30 May 2017 09:21:38 BST, Tony Marston wrote: > > > > > Different projects/teams/organisations are free to use whatever > > > naming convention they like, be it snake_case, CamelCase, > > > studlyCaps or whatever > > > > I think the discussion here is which convention we, as the PHP > > Internals project/team/organisation, want to use. It's nothing to do > > with forcing anyone else to do anything at all. > > It does not matter. If there was no agreed "standard" to begin with, > why should the core developers be forced to make unnecessary changes > just because someone that there should now be a standard. Who gives > this "someone" the right to demand a change in the name of consistency > when the definition of "consistency" has not even been agreed? If it > does not cause a problem then no time should be wasted in working on a > solution. It is also really irrelevant, as function and class names are case-insensitve. cheers, Derick