Re: ctype function (re?)naming

For starters (too long of a list and not that easy to decide on each and everyone of them) I'll give you what I can think of :) I started making a list of what looks OK to me but it became too long so I'll just mention what isn't OK in my opinion. Consider me pretty much pro all the other changes. In any case, I think what's important is not just putting underscores but changing the function names to reflect more what they do *even* if the names don't end up being exactly like their C api functions. I am for the socket_* change but this is maybe the exception to my previous sentence where I think we should keep stronger similarity (see 4)). 1) I'm for keeping get_all_headers() the way it is. 2) Things like gmp_clrbit should probably change to gmp_clear_bit and not gmp_clr_bit. Same goes for the rest of gmp_*. 3) Why change the imap ones to not include underscores? Looks as if you did the reverse here :) 4) If we decide to keep the socket functions like their C counterparts then I'd change the following two on your list: getsockname -> socket_getsockname() and not socket_get_name() getsockopt -> socket_getsockopt() and not socket_get_opt() 5) I think define() and defined() are OK as they are on the language level. 6) I think create_function() is OK. There was a long thread which decided upon this name. Same for function_exists(). That's pretty much it. I'll let you guys know if something else pops up. Interesting to see what others think. Andi