Re: PEAR Coding Standards question
| From: | Chuck Burgess | Date: | Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:58:40 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: PEAR Coding Standards question | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-50565@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Chuck Burgess <demon.gene@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Kevin van Zonneveld <
> kevin@vanzonneveld.net> wrote:
>
>> Why are the coding conventions so that I'm not allowed to prefix
>> protected methods with an underscore?
>>
>
> The decision on that was made on this old RFC [1]. Perhaps we should
> revisit it with a fresh discussion?
> --
> CRB
>
> [1] - http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=99
>
The most helpful comment on that RFC that helps me understand the overall
decision against underscores was from Justin -- "As protected members may be
declared public in extending classes, it makes sense to me to not force
protected members to be prefixed."
--
CRB