Re: [PEPr] Images::Imagick proposal, Naming Issues

> Good point. But wouldn't the developers of ImageMagick be concerned about > this - using the name for a PHP wrapper-class? Indeed, ImageMagick developpers did create the MSL forum, when I started to talk about MSL on the mailing-list! Comme with us to the IM community, this indeed has to be discussed on the both side, which I was trying to know if you had began this work. [...] > I will use C++-type Method-Names. I will use prefix/postfix where > appropriate or needed, or where a method-name (magnify) doesn't exactly > describes what the method does. Nevertheless I will keep the PEAR-Coding > standards for the method-names, this will mean that I won't use > underscores. I hope this is ok for the core-IM-user. IM is used by a large number of Free softwares. C and C++ apis are designed for system developpers of such softwares. I am not a monger and I don't like Perl at all, so I don't say this to promote Perl, but the Perl api is designed for end users such as graphists like me. So that's why I have to use this api often to do my work. IMHO you should really consider to get inspired by this Perl api. IMO a PEAR IM api should even get as closer as it can from this one, for a large number of reasons I have explain yet. Will you provide the support for this class ? Currently there is only one mailing list for IM users, C, C++, Perl and CLI, There is no forum for pecl-im users so those are not a lot but there question about pecl-im there too. I answer to them when I can. Moreover there is the portability point of view to consider. There are a lot of perl-IM users, so a lot of things to port from perl-im to pear-im. Consider also the support on the mailing list, answers will also be portable. > I like the C++ method-names. I will use these. Nevertheless, I will put > alias-methods into the source (@see magnifiy) for the 08/15 > Image_Magick-user ;) OK if you don't want to consider IM users first (even also). I think php users will have far more benefits with an IM standard api close to the Perl one, because of the existing docs tutorials on the web, and etc... this knowledge would then also be fully usefull to use IM in others cases than through php. > > No comments about the pear error handling system. > > I am not used to it at all yet. > > (I have started to read its doc some weeks ago, but I have to seriously > > look into it to learn how it works and make experimentations on it.) > > > > So I 100% trust in you for this part to be correct ;-) > > So do I ;) It was an insinuation about the rest, trying not to be too nasty with you :p I think I would prefer writing this class on my own, this way I would be sure things would be done in the right way from a user point of view. Or perhaps if you don't agree my remarks, this should be 2 IM pear apis, one from php/developer point of view, and another from a IMuser point of view? I think there will be more benefits for us to really work together, since you seem to feel as concerned as me by this great soft that is IM! I hope you will agree.