Re: Re: [PEPr] Comment on RFC::ProtectedMembers

Hi Lukas, Very well put. Lukas Smith wrote:

My reply was focused on this fact however: 1) CS helps define a common API style. 2) CS is there to make it easier to get into other peoples code.

Yes, I think that CS certainly has its merits. I think that over-rigid CS can be a little discouraging for submissions & patches; I think that it can therefore hurt contribution without making any significantly easiert-to-read code. Just speaking personally here, I think a balance could be found between maintaining code quality and also providing an environment that welcomes contributions, patches, new developers, etc. I'm not criticizing PEAR, though; coding standards definitely have a place, and while I may feel they are over strict for my projects, they do still serve as a guideline.

Both of them are delicate things which have little to do with right or wrong. As such we must not change it due to a current hype. But it also means that the CS (or atleast its idea) needs to appeal to a majority. I do agree however that a new major version is a chance to reexamine the current CS. However I would prefer to mess with it as little as possible and as seldom as possible. Therefore I ask all of you php5 folks to think of all the changes you would like to see. Do this with the approach that when there is no significant advantage leave the status quo, because again a specific CS is not something one necessarily needs to love as long as the general idea behind why we have a CS can still be appreciated.

Yup, I agree with that sentiment too. I would say for this '_' prefix requirement that PEAR would do well to make it optional for PHP5 packages. Simply, I do not feel that the PHP community on the whole will be using this in PHP5 anymore. Certainly there isn't a lot of PHP5 code yet to look at, but the packages out there that I have seen do not use this part of the PEAR coding standard as a rule. I think that PEAR standards should take into consideration the larger scope of developer trends.

And no this does not open the flood gates to the tab vs. space discussion. Anyone who brings stuff like this up in the context of this discussion has my permission to whip himself 50 times.

Yeah, well that's a CS requirement that makes sense. I think that everyone would agree that mixing these styles presents a pretty big readability issue -- no matter which format you prefer. On the other hand ... <whip/> ouch! nevermind. Hans