Re: ctype function (re?)naming
| From: | Marten Gustafsson | Date: | Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:20:30 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: ctype function (re?)naming | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-47546@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:stas@zend.com]
> > Sent: 26 February 2001 09:52
> > To: Hartmut Holzgraefe
> > Cc: php-dev@lists.php.net; php-qa@lists.php.net
> > Subject: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] ctype function (re?)naming
> >
> >
> > HH>> RFC: what should their names be in 4.0.5?
> > HH>>
> > HH>> ( ) stay with ctype_alpha() ...
> > HH>> (X) switch to ctype_isalpha() ...
> > HH>> ( ) switch to ctype_isalpha() ... and have ctype_alpha() aliases
> > HH>> ( ) switch to ctype_is_alpha() ...
> > HH>> ( ) switch to ctype_is_alpha() ... and have ctype_alpha() aliases
> > HH>> ( ) ____________________________________(fill in your idea here)
> >
> > And add isalpha alias for it.
>
> This is not in line with the other is_* functions. To keep in line with
> those I feel whatever we choose it should be ctype_is_* no is* as this is
> used to mean a different test (isset) under the variable functions.
>
> James
Absolutely, go with ctype_is_*
2c
Marten