Re: simple interface standard?

Jon Parise wrote:

On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 06:57:31PM -0400, Greg Beaver wrote:

Would there be an objection to specfying a simple standard for interfaces?

I don't see a reason to create an enforced standard here. That being said, I think your proposal is a good recommendation.

I should clarify a good point raised: global interfaces do differ from package-level interfaces. For instance, if I define an interface that only applies to PEAR_Exception, it should be included in the PEAR package. If I define an interface that applies to all template packages (and everybody likes it :), it should be located in its own package, even though it will be a single file. I do think the naming conventions should be worked out, location might not be the most important thing, as long as the user need not directly include it if he/she does not implement it. Greg