Re: [PHP4BETA] New function chrcount

At 12:52 AM 4/25/00 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote:

At 04:45 PM 4/24/00 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:

On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Colin Viebrock wrote:

How about num_times_char_is_in_string()? :) I'm still rooting for str_chr_freq(), or even just chr_freq(). I realize that etyomologists may cringe at the inexact use of "frequency", but "char_occurence" and "char_tally" look or sound funny, and and agree with Andi that "*_count" is kina ambiguous. How about str_matches() or chr_matches() ?

Well, this is ambiguous too. Is "matches" a noun or a verb here?

What is ambiguous is str_count(). It barely gives you a clue of what the function does. num_str_matches() might be more appropriate. Don't save a few characters just because you want to type less, it is more important that you find a name which makes sense and that the function's behavior can more or less be understood by its name.

Another possiblity is: substr_count() Andi --- Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> http://www.zend.com/