Re: Proposal for updating the PDF-extension

At 05:43 PM 1/24/2001 +0200, Jani Taskinen wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Uwe Steinmann wrote: On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:07:09PM +0100, Cynic wrote:

confuse folks. and the consensus (at least I got it it's agreed on) is pdf_add_local_link-like names. From the php point of view there should be underscores but

the pdflib api doesn't use them except for the one after the 'pdf'. The question is, shall we enforce the php naming or allow the pdflib naming. This API is used in PHP -> use the PHP naming. If we start making exceptions we end up having a mess in our hands.. :) There are probably other points which need to be discussed like what a function should return if it fails. Many php functions return false but pdflib's api requires to return -1. Again, we should be consistant within PHP the language. ie. if function fails -> RETURN_FALSE. IMO.

I agree. PHP doesn't need to map the C API's one-to-one but implement PHP functions in the PHP spirit and in a consistent way. That consistent way is returning false. We've talked about this numerous times. When we implement an extension module for a C library we don't even necessarily need to map the functions one-to-one to PHP but think of what API would be the most useful for PHP programmers allowing them flexibility but staying with it's short development time advantage. Andi