Re: default exceptions, interfaces, etc.

On 22 Mar 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote: >On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 21:33, Derick Rethans wrote: >> On Sun, 22 Mar 2003, Sterling Hughes wrote: >> >> > On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 19:02, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > As per naming convention, I think it'd be nice if the methods were >> > > named as: >> > > >> > > getmessage => get_message >> > > getcode => get_code >> > > >> > > If those are corrected, +1 for this feature. >> > > >> > >> > I was thinking of that - I would personally prefer get_message() and >> > get_code() naming, but that goes against pear's naming conventions, and >> > I want this to integrate well with pear (as a base class.) >> >> It's a PHP function, not PEAR code, so it should follow the PHP naming >> style. >> > >As I mentioned to Marcus, there are no naming conventions for OO code, >only procedural code (in PHP). Also, compliance with PEAR is a >pragmatic solution, because presumably all their code will be inheriting >from Exception. The largest, and the official OO library should be >in-sync with standard practices (and we have none yet regarding OO >code.) Even if we don't have specific rules (yet) for OO stuff, IMO, it should follow the existing rules. --Jani