RE: [PHP4BETA] A quick clarification question about PHP4...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Brain [mailto:jim_brain@csgsystems.com] > Sent: 30 August 1999 03:34 PM > To: Scott Stevenson; php4beta@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: [PHP4BETA] A quick clarification question about PHP4... > > In my not so humble opinion, passing vars to init code makes the language > much more useful. If I knew what the values would be when I > wrote the code, > I probably wouldn't need to pass them. I'm with Jim here, and although I've been through this one before, because I feel so strongly I feel it worth actively supporting him now just to make this point more visible. From php2 to php3 there was a converter. How will we get round some of these restrictions in php4? Will there be abother converter? If the converter can manage the conversion, why not php4 do it on the fly? Its the kind of things machine *are* good at. And if it can't, surely it will spoil the adoption of php4. > I thought getting rid of the value options for init classes would clean up > the spec a bit, as I am sure as shooting that if you allow people to pass > things, they will try to pass vars... Who wants to answer the > reason why it > can't be done in PHP4 50 million times for new users. Aye, and it will be asked again and again. > I post the concern for two reasons. One was to determine if this > was really > being taken out for some specific reason or of it was just hard > to do, so it > was left out. It seems the former reason explains. I feeling I got was basically lack of time, and it not being "important" to the developers. I think even though they dont rate it as a valuable feature, if they had more time they might add it anyway. > Two was to remind > everyone why I and probably so many others use PHP. It is much > easier than > ASP to learn and love. Typeless vars and not needing to type > vars or woory > about types when passing. (My personal pet peeve with > VB[Script|A|] is that > they require objects be declared of object type on the parm line on a > function, whereas regular vars do not. Very counterintuitive to > me. Either > require types on all vars, or none...) I agree with you on all this; copying C++ initialiser models and other junk doesn't impress me. I only know how *I* am already using it and that some of features I have depended on will vanish; and I will be forced to write clusmier code. Sam