>A heated argument seems to be developing, which IMHO makes no sense when we
>are discussing a tiny corner of the language. Yes, function names should be
>consistent, however because the current namespace is such a mess it is
>impossibly to argue the toss on this issue because all we can do is make
>function name compatible with one (or more) of a range of inconsistent
>'standards' throughout the language.
>It HAS to be time for a big tidy up, as it is clearly impossible to 'do the
>right thing' under current circumstances.
Phil Driscoll

Exactly, it has to be time to make plans for a complete overhaul of
EVERYTHING - we're getting nowhere and we have people saying that some
sections should stay as is_somthing() and other sections should be made
issomthing() which is just plain ridiculous. The whole language needs to be
the same, not just sections that people feel can be changed and others that
can't out of posterity etc.

Personally I think that it should be is_something() as it is much more
readable, for example if I typed like this:


You wouldn't find it as easy to read as:


Would you? I know I don't.

PHP is not C or Java or any other language, it is PHP - a language in it's
own right, therefore it can have it's own naming scheme for functions, just
because PHP and C have functions that do the same thing with similar names
(OK the same but with _ etc. etc.) it doesn't mean they have to follow the
naming scheme of the similar language - I hope you get what I mean here.

I'm not trying to get anyone's back up over this or be a pain, just to point
out that we shouldn't be blinded by tradition etc. and let it turn a great
language into something akin to what BASIC was - Spaghetti code most of the

Karl Austin

PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to