At 03:42 11-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote:
>The _() alias is no function. If someone build-in gettext, he or she
>should read the gettext documentation. The manual can be only a better
>function reference and if every alias would have a description just like
>the real functions, newbies will never find the functions to use. So let
>the aliases mentioned at the pages where the real functions are
>described. Look at http://php.net/mysql functions to get the point.
>There are many old function names, which cannot deprecated, because this
>functions are now aliases.
Egon,
There's absolutely no difference between aliases and functions from an end
user's point of view. There's even no different from a low-level C
perspective. You could have function foo and bar aliased to it, and
function bar with function foo aliased to it, which is an identical
situation. The only reason we have the 'FALIAS' macros is because we want
to be able to use the same C implementation for different PHP function names.
What's the point of this?
Simple - end users of PHP simply should not and do not care about whether
there's a FUNCTION or an FALIAS in the C source code. It walks like a
function, it barks like a function, it's a function. If it's not
deprecated, it should be documented.
Because the _ magic is apparently not being deprecated, as much as I hate
it, it should be documented. You should understand that the manual isn't
always used the way you described. My guess is that it's not even
*usually* used that way. It's a reference manual, rather than reading
material. At any rate, it should provide a reference manual to those who
read and maintain code, not only those who develop it initially. Right
now, it fails as far as _ goes.
Zeev
--
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]
