Re: I think that "Function naming inconsistency" bug deservers more attention
| From: | Lester Caine | Date: | Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:24:29 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: I think that "Function naming inconsistency" bug deservers more attention | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-65201@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Clint Priest wrote:
E_STRICT is bad enough and is one of the switches you would have to test everything against. But the main problem is that there is nothing in the historic code base that easily allows someone to identify which version of PHP IS required to run it? THIS is where move code forward to comply with the existing 'E_DEPRECATED/E_STRICT' is a minefield, so adding yet another major rework seems to be a step too far? Now if someone could come up with a third party tool that reads an application ... identifies all of the problems ... and at least offer pointers to fix them ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.ukSo I think we should try to keep PHP behavior unified and avoid behavior-modifying switches as much as possible.I agree all of that would suck, but would it suck less than the alternatives for the most people involved?