Re: pif
| From: | Zeev Suraski | Date: | Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:06:21 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: pif | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-64091@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
How about phf_, for PHP Helper Function?
I see a point in differentiating language level API functions (e.g. like output buffering) and module-specific helper functions (e.g., like php_mysql_do_connect()).
Zeev
At 22:57 22-08-01, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
I'm against that. Usually underscore-prefixed symbols are used by system libraries and OS and we don't need to go in that direction. I'm also against using pif_, because it's not an internal function that you are naming, but rather, a helper one. I don't really have an opinion on this matter, I just wanted to know what to do. So you are suggesting to simply stick with php_ prefix and not doing anything else? Then I'll comply with that. In math.c, I saw that use of underscore as first letter, so that is not according to how it should be done, I assume. Thanks for clearing this up, Jeroen-- Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> CTO & co-founder, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/