That's "Naming" not "Named".
From the perspective of providing reflection in general and giving something
for editors with code completion to use in specific, would there be an
interrest in backfilling the arg_info structs for internal functions (both
core and otherwise) with argument naming and type hinting even where it's
not technically needed?
On the con side, this does add memory usage and processing time for no
direct production benefit. Any utility which wanted this degree of
introspection could parse the XML protos in phpdoc and get the same (or
better) information, so it doesn't really gain that much for what it costs.
Do please forget about the work required to fill in this information. There
are more than enough volunteers to do the grunge work(and frankly it'd be
tough for 'em to get it horribly wrong), this is just a question of: "Would
there be an interrest in folding this data into the core?" and secondly:
"Should new extension writers be encouraged to fill this information in?".
-Sara
From the perspective of providing reflection in general and
giving something for editors with code completion to use in
specific, would there be an interrest in backfilling the
arg_info structs for internal functions (both core and
otherwise) with argument naming and type hinting even where
it's not technically needed?On the con side, this does add memory usage and processing
time for no direct production benefit. Any utility which
wanted this degree of introspection could parse the XML
protos in phpdoc and get the same (or
better) information, so it doesn't really gain that much for
what it costs.
Can you produce the arg_info structs from parsing the XML protos?
Do please forget about the work required to fill in this
information. There are more than enough volunteers to do the
grunge work(and frankly it'd be tough for 'em to get it
horribly wrong), this is just a question of: "Would there be
an interrest in folding this data into the core?" and secondly:
"Should new extension writers be encouraged to fill this
information in?".
Perhaps some tool to generate boiler plate docbook from introspection would be enough encouragement?
Jared
At 12:01 AM 1/18/2006, Sara Golemon wrote:
Do please forget about the work required to fill in this
information. There are more than enough volunteers to do the grunge
work(and frankly it'd be tough for 'em to get it horribly wrong),
this is just a question of: "Would there be an interrest in folding
this data into the core?" and secondly: "Should new extension
writers be encouraged to fill this information in?".
Andrei is waiting for volunteers to upgrade internal functions to Unicode :)
Andi
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Andrei is waiting for volunteers to upgrade internal functions to
Unicode :)
is there a todo list of functions converted, being worked on,
pending?
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Not sure if there's a list. I think it's 90% or so not converted.
Andrei, you can answer this one better than me.
At 03:12 PM 1/18/2006, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Andrei is waiting for volunteers to upgrade internal functions to Unicode :)
is there a todo list of functions converted, being worked on,
pending?--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Not sure if there's a list. I think it's 90% or so not converted.
Andrei, you can answer this one better than me.
well, the only one i checked so far was my levenshtein() function,
and seeing something as esoteric as this already being converted
made me think most of the reast was, too
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Try /unicode_progress.txt. Dmitry appears to have cleaned IS_BINARY
references from everything that was already unicoded prior to the Paris
meeting.
- Steph
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hartmut Holzgraefe" hartmut@php.net
To: "Andi Gutmans" andi@zend.com
Cc: "Sara Golemon" pollita@php.net; internals@lists.php.net; "Andrei
Zmievski" andrei@gravitonic.com
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 2:11 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Naming Arguments
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Not sure if there's a list. I think it's 90% or so not converted.
Andrei, you can answer this one better than me.well, the only one i checked so far was my
levenshtein()function,
and seeing something as esoteric as this already being converted
made me think most of the reast was, too--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer .
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com--
__________ NOD32 1.1371 (20060118) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
If that's accurate than from the 4000 or so functions we have, there
are about 3980 to go :)
At 04:45 PM 1/18/2006, Steph Fox wrote:
Try /unicode_progress.txt. Dmitry appears to have cleaned IS_BINARY
references from everything that was already unicoded prior to the
Paris meeting.
There is no "unconverted" function list. There is unicode-progress.txt
file where we have been tracking what has been done, but I'm not sure
as to its accuracy as of yet. Some of the functions listed there may
need to be looked over after Dmitry's patch.
-Andrei
Not sure if there's a list. I think it's 90% or so not converted.
Andrei, you can answer this one better than me.At 03:12 PM 1/18/2006, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Andrei is waiting for volunteers to upgrade internal functions to
Unicode :)is there a todo list of functions converted, being worked on,
pending?--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer
.
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
There is no "unconverted" function list. There is unicode-progress.txt
file where we have been tracking what has been done, but I'm not sure as
to its accuracy as of yet. Some of the functions listed there may need
to be looked over after Dmitry's patch.
It would be nice to be able to track this progress directly in the
source via some sort of meta-data. Embedding the "unicode status" in
function protos would be ideal.
Something like:
/* {{{ proto mixed foo(mixed bar)
Foos the bar */
Could become:
/* {{{ proto mixed foo(mixed bar) U
Foos the bar */
Meaning that this function has been tested to be functional under the
new Unicode rules.. or "Unicode-safe"
Opinions?
S