Re: Direction for the Function Renaming Effort

Phil Driscoll wrote: > Zak wrote: > >I think that this is more complicated than what we are discussing here, but > >is definately related. What do you think this version would entail and > >how would we implement it? > > I think that it is really what we are discussing here, but it might also > include settling on things like preferred forms for 'and' or && etc. It may > then be that a 'racing' version of php could be built which only did the > pure stuff and by judicious use of #ifdef did not suffer any performance hit > from carrying any baggage. > > >> We haven't so far discussed the order of function parameters. Consistent > and > >> guessable is good enough for me. > >I don't know that we can go back and fix anything - however, having a > >standard guideline for argument order would probably be a good thing. > > I appreciate that it might be hard to fix existing stuff (without use of a > php.ini switch) and that it is going to be more complicated than simple > aliasing, but I don't see the point in sorting out the function names if we > still have inconsistent needles and haystacks. If this is close to your heart, why not tackle it as a side project - see how long it takes us to make a nice clean version of PHP in our own image. ;) This is how the Perl developers seem to do it. Someone goes off on their own and cooks up a proof of concept and then presents it back to the group. At least then we would have a more practical grasp of the benefits, requirement and consequences. (By we, I mean Phil, myself and anyone else silly enough to be interested.) Note: I still think that we should just focus on fixing the obviously broken bits for the short term! :) --zak