Re: Re: Final RFC for Net_SMPP/Net_SMPP_Client
| From: | Ian Eure | Date: | Tue, 19 Jul 2005 23:39:12 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Final RFC for Net_SMPP/Net_SMPP_Client | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-38765@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tuesday 19 July 2005 04:30 pm, Lukas Smith wrote:
> Ian Eure wrote:
> > What I'm looking for here is a good reason why I should break adherence
> > to the SMPP specification in favor of the PEAR CS. So far, the only
> > argument I've gotten is "because you have to follow PEAR CS," while
> > ignoring many significant cases where it's a bad idea, or they are
> > ignored with no good reason.
>
> the point is to make it possible for users and tools to easily determine
> the location of classes in the directory structure that are referenced
> in their code ..
>
> that this was a good idea was proven once more by the advent of
> __autoload().
>
Ok. I accept that argument. However, I don't know how much it applies to
Net_SMPP; it knows where it's classes are, and takes care of loading them.
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature]
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature]