Re: Patch and structure question

> If you have a good idea for a more descriptive title, use it. If the > best you can find is "Example of functionname usage" I would, for > consistency, use "functionname example". Thanks, makes sense > The xml:id bit is just good practice, not 'a must'. > If you add xml:id to the example anchors will be created with that > name in the html so you can easily refer to that particular example > with "http://php.net/functionname#the-xml-id" rather > than relying on > the generated id which will be something like "id235exampl2345235" > (and will change if another example will be added somewhere before > that example in the manual). Same as above :) > You have a good point here, but is there an easier way to show the > results? > > is_int() is such a basic function so the example cannot be to > "complicated" for the newbies... > I don't know.. I would probably have committed var_dump() example > without thinking about it, but now that you mention it.. Yeah, that's my issue. I could do something like if (is_int(23)) { echo "It's an Integer, whooohooo"; }else { echo "not an integer, how sad"; } Which I think would actually be easier for a newbie to understand, but for me as a more advanced (I hope) user of the documentation, it's less useful, since it only indicates that the return value casts to true not type. I could go for a hybrid and indicate both.. But the doc docs indicate a preference for being short. I brought this up because I wasn't sure if there is a clear cut rule on the issue. Overall, I think the addition of the word type in the defenition of the function is really the biggest improvement I made. paul -- Paul Reinheimer Zend Certified Engineer