RE: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] ZEND_* instead of PHP_*

I believe that either ZEND_ or PHP_ is fine. However, if there is a recommendation, then the toolset should encourage developers to create new extensions in whatever way is recommended. I think this means that there are two solutions. First, change the PHP_ functions to be ZEND_ functions. Second, change the CODING_STANDARDS to state that either PHP_ or ZEND_ is acceptable, but within a single extension, the developer should remain consistent. I think either solution is good. For me, the important thing is that the toolset reflects and encourages the recommended practices. dave -----Original Message----- From: Thies C. Arntzen [mailto:thies@thiesos.org] Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 11:53 AM To: David Viner Cc: Php-Dev@lists. php. net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] ZEND_* instead of PHP_* On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 10:18:46AM -0700, David Viner wrote: > My thought was just that the coding standard recommends one approach (using > ZEND_), and the way to make a new extension (using ext_skel) generates a > skeleton file with PHP_. I agree that ZEND_ might not be 'better' than > PHP_. But it seems to me that if the recommendation is to use ZEND_, then > the default toolset should make extensions that follow that recommendation. > > The addition of this recommendation in the CODING_STANDARDS happened in feb > 2002. The mail on the discussion list can be found at: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-dev&m=101453899217990&w=2 > Should the > CODING_STANDARDS be amended to recommend neither ZEND_ or PHP_, but instead > recommend consistent usage of either one? my personal view is that even though PHP is "Powered by the ZendEngine" it's still php. so im in favour of leaving the PHP_ prefix. re, tc -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php