Re: [PEPr] Comment on File System::File_Mogile
| From: | Chuck Burgess | Date: | Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:07:26 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] Comment on File System::File_Mogile | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-49043@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Jan 31, 2008 12:41 AM, Christian Weiske <cweiske@cweiske.de> wrote:
> Hello Bill,
>
>
> > It states that for PHP5, protected members not preceded by an
> > underscore since PHP5 supports visibility. But, it doesn't mention
> > private members in PHP5. Should they always have an underscore
> > prefix? I don't see a need to, and it seems like an oversight in the
> > documentation. Could someone clarify?
> http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=99
>
> Quote:
> > A vote of +1 suggests class members should not be prefixed.
> 27 votes, so no prefixes.
>
> --
> Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
> Christian Weiske
>
Looking at that proposal, it reads to me like it was a decision against
prefixing *protected *members, whereas we're talking about *private* members
in relation to this package proposal. That RFC proposal shows "Private
members will still be prefixed."
--
CRB