On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:16:14 +0100 (CET) Sascha Schumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, as (hopefully) a last post from me in this thread, the fact is > > the"UglyCaps" is widely used, with PHP and others OO langages. The > > fact is that is somehow a de facto standard and ease our life to > > bind/port/extend/whatever existing codes/applications/libraries > > using php. > > Look, my stance is this. We don't need to repeat the > mistakes of others for our own APIs. Yeah and we are the kings and we know what is good or not... brrrrr ;-) > Which means I object to > the suggestion that studlyCaps ever become a recommendation > for creating new APIs in PHP (regardless of whether it is a > function or method name). This however leaves the door open > for people writing bindings to choose either way. If we keep the doors open then welcome to even more inconsistencies. A contrario, using the wider > > And except StudlyCaps is ugly and foo_bar is modern, any realistic > > and objective pros to keep foo_bar?.... > > This is all about readability. imho, this argument is weightless regarding the cons. Improving (so few...) readability by decreasing consistency with external tools/apps or the waste majority of existing codes is (imho again) the worst thing to do. Thinking about all the additionnal work only to make your eyes happy is even worst to me. End of discussion here, I cannot argue anymore against such aesthetic arguments... pierre -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
