Re: I think that "Function naming inconsistency" bug deservers more attention

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote: > Please stop with these. We can't keep explaining why function aliases, > <?php6 and deprecating function names that have been in use for nearly > 20 years is a bad idea. > > There is a reason that REFERER is still around in HTTP. It is obviously > not spelled correctly, but the pain of fixing it would far outweigh the > appeasement of the pedants out there. Does it make it harder to figure > out HTTP-related stuff? Not really, you won't necessarily know this term > even exists until you learn about it. Same goes for PHP functions. If > you understand where they come from you expect them to be named strlen, > strchr, strpos, etc. and if you don't understand their origin then you > simply learn them or let your IDE autocomplete them for you. > > And if you really think this is something a majority of people are > interested in, write up an RFC and put it to a vote. And when that fails > write yourself a userspace "consistency" library that names all the > functions the way you feel would make them consistent and put it out > there. or heck, if you are worried about performance of a userspace > wrapper, write an extension that does it. But please stop posting about > it on internals. There are a lot of real issues we should be spending > cycles on. > I don't think this could have been phrased any better :) *tip of the hat* > > -Rasmus > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >