Re: cvs: phpdoc /en/reference/filesystem/functions fclose.xml feof.xml fflush.xml fgetc.xml fgetcsv.xml fgets.xml fgetss.xml flock.xml fopen.xml
fpassthru.xml fputs.xml fread.xml fscanf.xml fseek.xml fstat.xml ftell.xml ftruncate.xml fwrite.xml p
| From: | Gabor Hojtsy | Date: | Sun, 12 Jan 2003 16:30:49 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: cvs: phpdoc /en/reference/filesystem/functions fclose.xml feof.xml fflush.xml fgetc.xml fgetcsv.xml fgets.xml fgetss.xml flock.xml fopen.xml fpassthru.xml fputs.xml fread.xml fscanf.xml fseek.xml fstat.xml ftell.xml ftruncate.xml fwrite.xml p |
||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.doc |
| Request: | Send a blank email to phpdoc+get-969350865@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> >> Changed <type>int</type> to <type>resource</type> for file
> >> handles.
> >> Also renamed <parameter>handle</parameter> to
> >> <parameter>fp</parameter>
> >> for consistency.
> >
> > I do think, that handle is much better than fp for beginners, so I would
> > do the other way...
> >
> I changed handle to fp (rather than the other way 'round) because all of
> those files listed used "fp" except for the ONE that used "handle".
> That's of course not to say that we can't still change 'em all to
> "handle", but there are several examples peppered throughout the manual
> which use $fp as the resource variable.
>
> I'm personnally -1 on using "handle" as the parameter name, but it's a
> weak -1... maybe more of a -0.5
Well, $fp is something kinda "leftover" for "file pointer". As fopen opens
many more things then files (eg. STDIN :), it technically not a
file pointer anymore. Therefore I think handle is better ;)
Goba