Googledocs is partially blocked.
Unfortunately, Googlesheets is among the blocked.

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pádraic Brady <[email protected]> wrote:
> Presumably the poll was held was to gauge support among framework users and 
> not just members of the contributor mailing list. That the poll is blocked in 
> your country may be either the poll host or the URL shortener service. Doubt 
> it was intentional! ;)
>
> Paddy
>
> On 13 Aug 2010, at 16:11, "D. J." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I only for myself:
> I was the first one replying your email of "General inclinations
> regarding prefixing non-public members?" with "No underscore".
> But I did not participate your poll for I really don't understand your
> intention of creating a poll after you had that email and so many
> people already responded.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> -- Саша Стаменковић <[email protected]> wrote
> (on Friday, 13 August 2010, 10:14 AM +0200):
> Can you tell us current score? :)
>
> There are currently 381 responses:
>
>  * 57% vote "Yes" (to remove the underscores)
>  * 38% vote "No" (to retain underscores)
>  * 4%  vote "No opinion"
>
> What has been interesting is that the percentages have remained
> consistent from the outset -- I expected more deviation. What is also
> interesting is that there is no real clear majority. Typically, I like
> to see a 2/3 vote to feel comfortable that the change is widely
> accepted, but that is not the case at this time.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>    ZF Coding Standards are based on PEAR's CS. That standard was developed
>    first by Horde, then expanded by PEAR, during the PHP 4 lifecycle. PHP 4
>    had no concept of visibility in its object model; to provide some
>    pseudo-visibility, PEAR CS mandated that members considered non-public
>    should be prefixed with an underscore.
>
>    With the advent of PHP 5, PHP's object model received visibility
>    operators in the form of private, protected, and public. Applying PEAR
>    CS to PHP 5 code meant that if you marked a member as private or
>    protected, you would also prefix with the underscore. Many have felt
>    this is redundant, and also that it makes refactoring more difficult
>    (changes in visibility often mean renaming the members). Proponents of
>    the standard, however, argue that the leading underscore leads to easier
>    maintenance of the code -- you know immediately what the visibility of
>    the member you're dealing with is just by looking at it.
>
>    PEAR2 has decided to eschew the underscore prefix:
>
>       http://wiki.pear.php.net/index.php/MeetingMinutes20080824#
>    Underscore_prefix_on_private_.28protected.3F.29
>
>    Basically, this rule is no longer required (as it was in PEAR1), though
>    developers may choose to use them.
>
>    What is YOUR opinion? Should the underscore be dropped in ZF2?
>    Please vote!
>
>       http://is.gd/eeA6f
>
>    Please do _not_ reply to this thread -- the arguments for and against
>    are well known at this time -- we're simply trying to decide on whether
>    or not to amend the coding standards for ZF2.
>
>    Thanks!
>
>    --
>    Matthew Weier O'Phinney
>    Project Lead            | [email protected]
>    Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
>    PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
>
>
>
> --
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> Project Lead            | [email protected]
> Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
> PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
>
>
>
> --
> Dev Lead for Xoops Engine
> Internet Application R&D @PerfectWorld
>
>



-- 
Dev Lead for Xoops Engine
Internet Application R&D @PerfectWorld

Reply via email to