Re: kick-off

I think allowing functions is a good idea. They are also faster. Think of the numerous libC functions, similar functions might end up in PEAR. I think functions should have a prefix based on the name of their package. Andi At 04:39 PM 2/28/00 -0500, Stig S. Bakken wrote:

Welcome to the PEAR mailing list! I'd like to start off by throwing out the first unresolved issue I can think of: Should PEAR contain classes and extensions only, or functions too? By using the Class::method() syntax, functions can be made part of a class but still be available directly, so I lean towards using only classes. If we do decide on having functions too, we should consider namespace issues: should functions then have a prefix based on the name of the package they are from (for example "db_mysql_query"), or should they have simpler names? - Stig

--- Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> http://www.zend.com/