PHP5->4 stripper.. was Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: Version documentation... .....
| From: | Alan Knowles | Date: | Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:19:37 +0000 |
| Subject: | PHP5->4 stripper.. was Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: Version documentation... ..... | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-28617@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
This does bring up an interesting issue.. how feasible is stripping packages which use PHP5 specific coee, on install, to be PHP4 compatible...??
Assuming the php4 tokenizer reads php5 files ok..
Things that should be possible.
= replace privates/protected etc. on vars/ methods..
= remove type hinting on method args.
Things that are not really going to be possible...
= recognising code taking advantage on non-cloning behavior
= exceptions...
Can anyone think of other issues..
It would make migration considerably easier... for users and developers..
Regards
Alan
Stefan Neufeind wrote:
On 30 Apr 2004 at 0:26, Klaus Guenther wrote:-- Can you help out? Need Consulting Services or Know of a Job? http://www.akbkhome.comI'm about to release HTML_Page2. HTML_Page is not documented. Should the documentation be classified under HTML_Page or HTML_Page2? It is possible that people will stick to individual versions (e.g., if MDB2 == DB_v2, then replacing the DB docs would be foolish). However, I'm not going to release docs for HTML_Page. That will remain as-is. And I'll only document my 2.x series.Still I'd favor having documentation for HTML_Page2, not generally HTML_Page. There are some packages which still actively support there 1.x-versions, maybe because 2.x is php5-only or similar. And since a new major most times also means a drastically changed API, I'd prefer to have api-docs for both major version. If you're not going to document HTML_Page that's fine with me - but naming should be consistent in my eyes, so adding the "2" to the name is imho needed. Stefan