Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
You guys make me laugh... :)
(And I really actually mean that in a nice way... that last bit was
quite funny. And yes, size does matter... some don't like it _too_
big.)
But, I digress.
I'm OK with taking this off-list... though I'd rather publicly reply.
Yeah, I meant procedural, not functional. Chalk one up to another
stupid mistake.
Also, realize, I'm not saying that we change PHP tomorrow... hell, we
don't even necessarily have to change PHP... I'm saying we think about
our philosophies and take these agile philosophies into view when we
consider making changes to PHP and designing our own applications.
Yes, I'm aware performance is a huge deal: I'm OK with developers
spending 90% of their time on performance tweaking and 10% on new
thinking... I don't want changes to hurt the people... that's
definitely not human-centric!
I like some stuff, and I know that what I like a lot of people don't
like (such as everything-as-objects). My ideas aren't to deface PHP...
Everything-as-objects in a transparent manner. Yeah, 5-length won't
be too useful, but ['one', 'two', 'three']-length would be, as well
as strings with -replace('/with/', 'as') objects... And of course,
other ways would work as well...
Hey, you know, that's just how I prefer... I like seeing numbers as
numbers with their own properties, same as strings and arrays, et al.
Hey, I know I'm weird, but I think I'm right.
But let me recenter that thought again... I'm not saying that we have
to change the language now, if ever: it's about our philosophies.
I mean, where did our changes come from anyways? Some crazy guy came
in and made suggestions that opened up new ways of thinking or at
least new ideas, maybe inspiring the current iteration we use today.
I'm hoping to act as a catalyst, even if just a little bit of movement
is made.
As far as the funeral goes, I'm not saying that PHP is on the crash
course either. I used that metaphor because I think that the way we
think about our language will become too strict or cemented to be
willing to make changes necessary to keep PHP alive: it will become as
hard to move within the community as the Titanic.
As far as AJAX is concerned: yeah, it's a bitch. I've gotten it to
work pretty cleanly in a newer project of mine with little
discrepencies, and, hopefully, if what I've been doing is good enough,
I might write about it (but we all know how well that goes over,
haha).
With all of the comments and all, I've lost track if there were any
others I wanted to make. Ah well, I'm sure you're more the happier for
me to stop (as am I, at this point).
I do want to say Thank you for your responses: I did want responses
and, eventually, I got some meaty responses! All the while, we were
thinking about things, which is good. That's the best way to start.
Oh, before I go... I want to echo the fact that AJAX and Web 2.0 are
not the same... AJAX is a tool, Web 2.0 (or Agile development) is a
philosophy.
M.T.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
You guys make me laugh... :) :-) (And I really actually mean that in a nice way... that last bit was quite funny. And yes, size does matter... some don't like it _too_ big.) Damn, just my luck :-D As far as AJAX is concerned: yeah, it's a bitch. I've gotten it to work pretty cleanly in a newer project of mine with little discrepencies, and, hopefully, if what I've been doing is good enough, You might want to wait a bit and then check out weberdev as Tedd from the list has written quite a sweet ajax (mini-framework?) that he has been kind enough to share with me when I was experimenting with ajax, you can either write to him and _request him to give you some sample code or wait a bit as he told me he's going to submit it to weberdev soon. As for writing your opinions, I say go for it, but remember that you will get responses to it...some that you may like and..well, you kind of know the rest :-D One suggestion, if you are going to write articles like the last one (which personally I didnt go for either - putting it mildly ;-) ) please put it on a page where people can comment directly under it so it wont be like this original thread and this sub-thread which is so far OT ,flaming etc, I for one would appreciate that. My two cents.. Mvh, -Ryan -- - The faulty interface lies between the chair and the keyboard. - Creativity is great, but plagiarism is faster! - Smile, everyone loves a moron. :-) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
[snip] it's about our philosophies. [/snip] Too bad your article didn't reflect that as well as you might have liked. And Web 2.0 is a label, the underlying philosophy has been there for years (before you ever got Dreamweaver to write your first line of HTML for you). Ajax is a label for a loose group of tools some cat wrote about a couple of years ago. Agile development is a label (just as Extreme Programming is) to describe a quicker turn-around from concept to working application that cuts out several steps that will be handled later. Your disjointed article does a disservice to any philosophy or tool mentioned within it. Those of us who have been doing this for a while (some for decades) have examined and re-examined our philosophies so many times it would curl the peach fuzz on your baby-fatted butt. Dude, you're 20 years old and quite frankly wet behind the ears. You have brilliant potential (as I have said before after reviewing Canvas) but you have a long way to go. P.S. For those of you who wanted this off-list just don't read it. You know what the subject is. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
On 19/04/06, Matt Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that PHP is a functional language, and secondly, an OO language, but I think that you can blend these things better and have the OO brought to the forefront a bit more. PHP is not a functional language, it's an imperative language. -robin -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
On Wed, April 19, 2006 9:42 am, Matt Todd wrote: Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number-length or $word-as_array() giving you letters. I think you might want to consider using Common Lisp, then. Cuz pretty much everyting in Common Lisp is an Object. 'Course, it's even WAY older than PHP, so you won't, but there it is. I am curious to know what you think this should do: $number = 5; echo $number-length; Exactly what is the length of a number? Is 5 longer than 4? How about -5? Is that the same length as 5? Sheesh! Let me know when Web 2.0 is actually released. Until then: SHUT UP! -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Here's an invitation to take this off-list. I've posted my thoughts on my (currently design-less and under massive construction relocation) website. Direct link to post: http://s153531379.onlinehome.us/index.php/journal/the-clash-of-the-php-mailing-list-and-the-proverbial-web-2-0-iceberg Permanent Site: http://www.johndwells.com Cheers, John W -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Matt Todd wrote: There's nothing wrong with staying true to the philosophy at all, I just think that it may well be detrimental in the end. And that is what I said in the (toilet)paper, that there will be (emphasis on the eventuality, not on the present actuality) a time that PHP will become the old stuff because it did not evolve with the philosophies. It's true that a language that doesn't evolve with the market will die, but still you can expect us to follow any new trend because they believe it's the way to salvation. Try to think first if the new philosophies can be properly applied to this market, if they can bring a proper solution to our problems (if not they will become a new problem and we don't want that). Anyway, programming languages have proved to live longer that one could ever expect. Before attending to PHP's funeral, I'm pretty sure we'll be burying another die harder language, like the C language, in a very emotional ceremony (I can almost see it, someone will cry loudly: I'll miss using your precompiler macros!). These philosophies are new and I can understand thinking that it's hype, but it's important to recognize it as legitimate. Agile Development (and the broader term Web 2.0) is, right now, the bleeding edge of development, and I and many others see it as the future of development philosophies. Don't say it's good, prove it! All I can see in Web 2.0 is those guys are making more money than us, let's copy them! Those guys are exploring uncharted area in web development and they're more worried in making their software work rather than worrying if the philosophy is appropiate or not. Still, marketing rules say no mather how unappropiate your company's philosophy is, it's the best. Of course they will say Web 2.0 is the best, is what they're doing and they don't want anyone to think they aren't giving the clients the best there is. And now we have to deal with even crazier request from our clients, like making an AJAX application in a week that supports all imaginable browsers in the market. They really believe that AJAX is a fucking walk in the park! AJAX is a fricking cocktail of death! Bring out the spaghetti code and let us feast on an eternal reengeneering cycle! I'm not saying that Rasmus can't see, but that he will easily choose to stay with how he sees the forest – understandable as I choose to stay with what I see, but I think he has a lot invested in his view and may not open up as easily. Stop blaming the poor guy! He only made a tool he needed and was kind enough to share it with the world. If you want to blame someone for what direction PHP has taken, blame us! That's the whole point of PHP being open source, isn't it? All the current problems in PHP are directly or indirectly caused by whining developers and their extravagant requests. Magic quotes are bad? Well, teach those bastards to properly quote their sql's strings! You think that currently PHP is being lead to unavoidable doom? By all means, be my guest and make PHP++, for all I care. The code it's there. To Stut: Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number-length or $word-as_array() giving you letters. Have you stop to think what the efficiency cost would be to make everything an object? We're already suffering much to avoid the waiting 2.5 second it's way too much cutline (they say we can't do real time applications) and you want to keep adding functionality that will deteriorate this? I love the way basic types are handled by PHP, I specially love PHP arrays, if you touch them, I fucking kill you! I know that PHP is a functional language, and secondly, an OO language, but I think that you can blend these things better and have the OO brought to the forefront a bit more. Yes, I'm a fan of OO, but I know that many people aren't and don't use PHP's OO (and don't when it's appropriate). But I know you can integrate OO without having to force the functional programmers to give up their way. Have you been attending to your CS lessons? PHP is an *IMPERATIVE* language, and secondly, that the language provides OOP features doesn't make it an OO language. Maybe you have chosen your language wrongly, you should try JSP or any other Java based web server technology. PS: I think you have the terms wrong. What you're calling functional programming may be what is usually known as procedural programming. This is just ONE thing that could make PHP better and allow for more modern philosophical development. Particularly, I would like to see more creativity. Sure, PHP's moving fast, but with our big things being Unicode support and removing globals and safe mode, I think that we could be a little more innovative for PHP6. Again, it's not behind the times right now, but the times are changing and I'd like to see PHP change with them. M.T. I won't deny times are
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Maybe it is just me, but I think these types of discussions/debates concerning opposing view points on the direction of web programming is as imperative to the general PHP community (i.e. this list) as the dangers of register globals and magic quotes etc At least more relevant then the infamous PHP Interview thread a week or so ago ;-) -B Martin Alterisio El Hombre Gris wrote: Matt Todd wrote: There's nothing wrong with staying true to the philosophy at all, I just think that it may well be detrimental in the end. And that is what I said in the (toilet)paper, that there will be (emphasis on the eventuality, not on the present actuality) a time that PHP will become the old stuff because it did not evolve with the philosophies. It's true that a language that doesn't evolve with the market will die, but still you can expect us to follow any new trend because they believe it's the way to salvation. Try to think first if the new philosophies can be properly applied to this market, if they can bring a proper solution to our problems (if not they will become a new problem and we don't want that). Anyway, programming languages have proved to live longer that one could ever expect. Before attending to PHP's funeral, I'm pretty sure we'll be burying another die harder language, like the C language, in a very emotional ceremony (I can almost see it, someone will cry loudly: I'll miss using your precompiler macros!). These philosophies are new and I can understand thinking that it's hype, but it's important to recognize it as legitimate. Agile Development (and the broader term Web 2.0) is, right now, the bleeding edge of development, and I and many others see it as the future of development philosophies. Don't say it's good, prove it! All I can see in Web 2.0 is those guys are making more money than us, let's copy them! Those guys are exploring uncharted area in web development and they're more worried in making their software work rather than worrying if the philosophy is appropiate or not. Still, marketing rules say no mather how unappropiate your company's philosophy is, it's the best. Of course they will say Web 2.0 is the best, is what they're doing and they don't want anyone to think they aren't giving the clients the best there is. And now we have to deal with even crazier request from our clients, like making an AJAX application in a week that supports all imaginable browsers in the market. They really believe that AJAX is a fucking walk in the park! AJAX is a fricking cocktail of death! Bring out the spaghetti code and let us feast on an eternal reengeneering cycle! I'm not saying that Rasmus can't see, but that he will easily choose to stay with how he sees the forest – understandable as I choose to stay with what I see, but I think he has a lot invested in his view and may not open up as easily. Stop blaming the poor guy! He only made a tool he needed and was kind enough to share it with the world. If you want to blame someone for what direction PHP has taken, blame us! That's the whole point of PHP being open source, isn't it? All the current problems in PHP are directly or indirectly caused by whining developers and their extravagant requests. Magic quotes are bad? Well, teach those bastards to properly quote their sql's strings! You think that currently PHP is being lead to unavoidable doom? By all means, be my guest and make PHP++, for all I care. The code it's there. To Stut: Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number-length or $word-as_array() giving you letters. Have you stop to think what the efficiency cost would be to make everything an object? We're already suffering much to avoid the waiting 2.5 second it's way too much cutline (they say we can't do real time applications) and you want to keep adding functionality that will deteriorate this? I love the way basic types are handled by PHP, I specially love PHP arrays, if you touch them, I fucking kill you! I know that PHP is a functional language, and secondly, an OO language, but I think that you can blend these things better and have the OO brought to the forefront a bit more. Yes, I'm a fan of OO, but I know that many people aren't and don't use PHP's OO (and don't when it's appropriate). But I know you can integrate OO without having to force the functional programmers to give up their way. Have you been attending to your CS lessons? PHP is an *IMPERATIVE* language, and secondly, that the language provides OOP features doesn't make it an OO language. Maybe you have chosen your language wrongly, you should try JSP or any other Java based web server technology. PS: I think you have the terms wrong. What you're calling functional programming may be what is usually known as procedural programming. This is just ONE thing that could make PHP better and allow for more
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Martin Alterisio El Hombre Gris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Matt Todd wrote: snip Have you stop to think what the efficiency cost would be to make everything an object? We're already suffering much to avoid the waiting 2.5 second it's way too much cutline (they say we can't do real time applications) and you want to keep adding functionality that will deteriorate this? I love the way basic types are handled by PHP, I specially love PHP arrays, if you touch them, I fucking kill you! And I'll offer to hold your coat while you're doing it! -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
On Thursday 20 April 2006 1:18 am, Richard Lynch wrote: Is 5 longer than 4? Size doesn't matter. At least that's what I've been told. ;) -- Joe Henry www.celebrityaccess.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
On Thursday 20 April 2006 1:18 am, Richard Lynch wrote: Is 5 longer than 4? Size doesn't matter. At least that's what I've been told. ;) -- You've been lied to m8 :-D -- - The faulty interface lies between the chair and the keyboard. - Creativity is great, but plagiarism is faster! - Smile, everyone loves a moron. :-) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Yes, I absolutely agree that Rasmus is awesome and his accomplishments are far and beyond amazing, but I'm saying that I think that Rasmus is motivated to stay true to PHP's philosophies and not be willing to rethink them: that is what I meant by that. In no way am I saying that Rasmus doesn't DESERVE to align your theories with or your ideas with, but I think that he may be too vested in PHP and what he has been doing to realign himself. But of course, that is just conjecture. I'm just saying that I think he has vested interest and will be least of all willing to make the shift in thought (even if he did think it held some merit). Again, I in no way meant any offense to Rasmus, and I stand by that. M.T. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
[snip] Yes, I absolutely agree that Rasmus is awesome and his accomplishments are far and beyond amazing, but I'm saying that I think that Rasmus is motivated to stay true to PHP's philosophies and not be willing to rethink them: that is what I meant by that. [/snip] What, exactly, is wrong with staying true to the philosophy? If you created a language based on a certain philosophy wouldn't you want to stay true to them? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Kid (and I mean that loosely), you should have stopped while you were ahead of the tide and let it die... Instead you had to open up and add more drivel that: 1. shows how little you think about those who have come before you and their ability to shift as technology changes 2. further shoved your feet in your own throat Build an application and not just Hello World but a true application and then see how welcome you are to embrace technology methods that make the application more powerful and gives your skills a greater flexibility. Only after doing that, will you (HOPEFULLY) grasp that not only have you looked through a window into a tunnel with your defense of your Web2.0 (toilet)Paper, but in continuing down the path of he can't see the forest for the trees further alienated yourself. Wolf -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
umm guys, can you take this offlist please (if you wish to continue this) as I dont really see how this can benifit anyone. Cheers, Ryan --- Matt Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I absolutely agree that Rasmus is awesome and his accomplishments are far and beyond amazing, but I'm saying that I think that Rasmus is motivated to stay true to PHP's philosophies and not be willing to rethink them: that is what I meant by that. In no way am I saying that Rasmus doesn't DESERVE to align your theories with or your ideas with, but I think that he may be too vested in PHP and what he has been doing to realign himself. But of course, that is just conjecture. I'm just saying that I think he has vested interest and will be least of all willing to make the shift in thought (even if he did think it held some merit). Again, I in no way meant any offense to Rasmus, and I stand by that. M.T. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- - The faulty interface lies between the chair and the keyboard. - Creativity is great, but plagiarism is faster! - Smile, everyone loves a moron. :-) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Jay Blanchard wrote: [snip] Yes, I absolutely agree that Rasmus is awesome and his accomplishments are far and beyond amazing, but I'm saying that I think that Rasmus is motivated to stay true to PHP's philosophies and not be willing to rethink them: that is what I meant by that. [/snip] What, exactly, is wrong with staying true to the philosophy? If you created a language based on a certain philosophy wouldn't you want to stay true to them? with regard to the ever changing world of internet this is the quote from the top of Rasmus' resume: The web is changing. It is more dynamic and more programmable than ever before. This new programmable web needs tools and systems that can talk to each other in a way that is both useful and approachable. The learning curve has to be shallow and the results immediate. This is what I do. 'nuff said, right Jay? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Matt Todd wrote: But of course, that is just conjecture. I'm just saying that I think he has vested interest and will be least of all willing to make the shift in thought (even if he did think it held some merit). I didn't read that article too closely, but I would appreciate *brief* answers to these questions... In what way does PHP not allow development in the style that has unfortunately become known as Web 2.0? Why does it need to change? If you were in charge of PHP development what would you be doing to make it better? As a PHP developer with too many years experience to mention I am curious about specifically why you are of the opinion that it's behind the times. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Stut wrote: Matt Todd wrote: But of course, that is just conjecture. I'm just saying that I think he has vested interest and will be least of all willing to make the shift in thought (even if he did think it held some merit). I didn't read that article too closely, but I would appreciate *brief* answers to these questions... In what way does PHP not allow development in the style that has unfortunately become known as Web 2.0? Why does it need to change? If you were in charge of PHP development what would you be doing to make it better? As a PHP developer with too many years experience to mention I am curious about specifically why you are of the opinion that it's behind the times. -Stut Right, That's why ppl use PHP more than Perl/CGI for example. It's because PHP is easier to understand and to code (for most ppl). And when something else comes that is more useful than PHP and will come in more handy than it than PHP will take his place in order. That's how stuff goes. I don't think it's that important to debate it that much. -- Smileys rule (cX.x)C --o(^_^o) Dance for me! ^(^_^)o (o^_^)o o(^_^)^ o(^_^o) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
There's nothing wrong with staying true to the philosophy at all, I just think that it may well be detrimental in the end. And that is what I said in the (toilet)paper, that there will be (emphasis on the eventuality, not on the present actuality) a time that PHP will become the old stuff because it did not evolve with the philosophies. These philosophies are new and I can understand thinking that it's hype, but it's important to recognize it as legitimate. Agile Development (and the broader term Web 2.0) is, right now, the bleeding edge of development, and I and many others see it as the future of development philosophies. I'm not saying that Rasmus can't see, but that he will easily choose to stay with how he sees the forest – understandable as I choose to stay with what I see, but I think he has a lot invested in his view and may not open up as easily. To Stut: Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number-length or $word-as_array() giving you letters. I know that PHP is a functional language, and secondly, an OO language, but I think that you can blend these things better and have the OO brought to the forefront a bit more. Yes, I'm a fan of OO, but I know that many people aren't and don't use PHP's OO (and don't when it's appropriate). But I know you can integrate OO without having to force the functional programmers to give up their way. This is just ONE thing that could make PHP better and allow for more modern philosophical development. Particularly, I would like to see more creativity. Sure, PHP's moving fast, but with our big things being Unicode support and removing globals and safe mode, I think that we could be a little more innovative for PHP6. Again, it's not behind the times right now, but the times are changing and I'd like to see PHP change with them. M.T. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
On 19 Apr 2006, at 15:42, Matt Todd wrote: there will be (emphasis on the eventuality, not on the present actuality) a time that PHP will become the old stuff because it did not evolve with the philosophies. Philosophies are just that.. a philosophy. They are not standards. They are also two-a-penny. If PHP were to jump onboard and natively and dramatically support all philosophies that came along, we'd have one hell of a mess on our hands. Over time the good philosophies remain, and the weak ones die away. The really good ones get turned into standards that are then safe to adopt in a far broader sense. Agile Development (and the broader term Web 2.0) is, right now, the bleeding edge of development, and I and many others see it as the future of development philosophies. I've yet to see anything Web 2.0 related that PHP cannot do now, today. Agile Development is a different kettle of fish, and a highly debatable one as to its merits. No-one here doubts the merits of Web 2.0 (if there is any such thing), we all know that if such methodologies wish to be used, they can be - right now. Which is why it's really not a 'big issue' to most people here. I'm not saying that Rasmus can't see, but that he will easily choose to stay with how he sees the forest – understandable as I choose to Rasmus !== PHP A strong influence? Yes. The original architect? Yes. But he himself isn't PHP, he doesn't drive every single element of its development and direction (he isn't that selfish!), so to single him out on a personal level as being in control of where PHP does (or doesn't) go is a bit nuts, imho. Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number-length or $word-as_array() giving you letters. Sadly not everything maps to 'real world' data. How do you represent something that is intangible in the real world? Your 'basic variables as objects' idea is curious, I would need to see more (useful) examples before passing comment. Cheers, Rich -- http://www.corephp.co.uk Zend Certified Engineer PHP Development Services -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
