Re: [PHP4BETA] What is ext/lcg/lcg.c?
| From: | Stig Bakken | Date: | Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:32:40 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PHP4BETA] What is ext/lcg/lcg.c? | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.version4 |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-version4+get-3734@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 11:50:29PM +0200, Egon Schmid wrote:
> > Sascha Schumann wrote:
> >
> > > There are no user-level functions, therefore there are no
> > > function prototypes in lcg.c. That's correct according to the
> > > coding standards.
> >
> > BTW, it looks like another PHP module. Why is it there and not where it
> > should be.
>
> I debated this point with Andrey already. Extract:
>
> > Why not make php_lcg.h and lcg.c in php root dir or
> > ext/standard?
>
> That would have required changing other files, such as
> internal_functions.c.in. Seperating parts of the whole system
> makes it easier accessible to new developers. When you are
> new to the PHP4 source repository at all, it will ease the
> learning process, if part X of the system is in ext/X.
> Additionally, for the developer writing the part of the
> system, he or she does not need to care about modifying other
> files, since buildconf does most of the hard work.
>
> If there should be a real need to "justify" a new directory,
> adding a user function which returns a value from the lcg
> should be straight forward.
The extension paradigm in php4 is like this (ext/standard is excused):
1. each extension is a part of PHP we want to be optional
2. an extension should, as a main rule, not depend on the presence of
another extension
3. no part of PHP should depend on an extension being present
I never documented this except for in mails and commit messages, but this
is roughly it.
If all lcg does is provide a few utility functions, its proper place is in
ext/standard or the main dir.
- Stig