Re: [PEPr] Comment on RFC::Prefix all packages with P_

On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 10:46:13 -0400 danielc@analysisandsolutions.com (Daniel Convissor) wrote: > Hi Scott: > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:34:23AM -0400, Scott Mattocks wrote: > > Hi Pierre, > > > > So we update Validate to P_Validate, but Date hasn't been updated > > yet. What does P_Validate now optionally depend on? > > The package names don't need to change. Just the class names. > The transition can be easy by using Greg's suggestion: > > ---- PEAR/Date.php ---- > // New file to conform with naming conventions. > class PEAR_Date { > // Actual gets moved into here. > } > ----------------------- > > ---- Date.php ---- > // Old file with empty stub class for backwards compatibility. > require_once 'PEAR/Date.php'; > class Date extends PEAR_Date { > } > ------------------ > > With this pattern, the old and new files and class names remain in > tact. Thus, older PEAR packages and userland scripts are not forced > to change anything. This enhancement can even be done inside a > regular release of a package. You should really start to use/imagine another example, that's not going to happen with Date or any of my packages :) Cheers, -- Pierre