Re: Re: convention about function naming II
| From: | Hartmut Holzgraefe | Date: | Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:02:34 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: convention about function naming II | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.dev php.qa |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-41842@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
i've now changed the developement branch accordingly
(including the regression tests)
what is the current policy regarding the RC-Branch?
Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> Yes, definitely.
>
> Zeev
>
> At 18:25 18/12/2000, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> >I prefer making function name changes *before* people use them. Also
> >you're unlikely to break stuff. I would put it in 4.0.4.
> >
> >Andi
> >
> >At 15:40 18/12/00 +0100, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> >>ctype is an execption in that it provides some functions that are
> >>in very common use in C so that they might perhpas deserve to keep
> >>their names that we are all used to,
> >>
> >>but on the other hand they do collide with the variable information
> >>functions like isset() or is_string()
> >>
> >>so i did want to rename theese to ctype_*() but didn't make it in time
> >>before the 4.0.4RCs where rolled out, so it's C-ish style for now
> >>
> >>but both the README and the EXPERIMENTAL files in ext/ctype say that
> >>changes may still happen, so it's not finally decided yet ...
> >>(thats what the EXPERIMENTAL files are for anyway ...)
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe hartmut@six.de http://www.six.de
+49-711-99091-77