Re: Re: Named arguments revisited

Derick Rethans wrote: > You do know that that means that we have to consistently name all > parameters to our 4000+ functions, right? On this note, and to throw in my 2c on the issue (from a doc standpoint): there are places in the manual where I've (personally) deliberately changed the parameter names that the developer chose, to make more sense in the docs. (I don't remember exactly where I did this, but I suspect it was in classkit or apc.) An example: (C): PHP_FUNCTION(some_file_function) { ... if (zend_parse_parameters(ZEND_NUM_ARGS() TSRMLS_CC, "s", &strfn, &strfn_len) == FAILURE) ... (docs): mixed some_file_function( string $filename ) ... "fn" might make sense in C, but not in the docs (where it should be the more verbose "filename"). So, each function would need to not only standardize (as Derick mentioned)--having to lookup "fn" vs "filename" defeats the purpose of named parameters--but the docs would need to be synced for each function, too. While the thought of never remembering the parameter order again makes my mouth (mind?) water, I don't see how it could happen. As for userspace, a suitable framework could enforce this as associative arrays, with little overhead on the coding/execution fronts (especially juicy are the possibilities that have become available with Reflection). S