> I think PHP 6.0 provides an excellent opportunity to rectify a huge number
> of frustrating inconsistencies; it would be a shame not to make the most of
> this.
>
>
>
> The two biggest inconsistencies raised by users and "language comparison"
> groups are a) function argument order, and b) function naming.
>
>
>
> Granted, swapping the arguments will be nightmarish for the users. However,
> we have a long time to discuss possibilities to alleviate the problem. I
> agree with Jani, a list of inconsistencies should be compiled and discussed.
>
>
>
> If it is decided that swapping the function arguments around would be too
> cataclysmic for upgrading users, we should at the very least institute a new
> strict function naming policy.
>
> My favourite example of inconsistency is htmlentities and
> html_entity_decode. These are easy to fix, and a relatively easy BC break
> for the user to deal with.
>
>
> I suggest we extend Jani's previous suggestion; by including a list of
> function name inconsistencies in the discussion.
ppl might use the dirty but fast function instead of a wrapper which
is slow and have to remember new function name
>
so there is a "declare". but even with "declare" ppl writing new code
while still have to maintain old code get crazy
although php-internals guys should jump out and say "hey, php is not
java. not everything is object", but here's another idea.
still, with the "argument swaping table" but write as a object alike
syntax instead:
$str = $str->str_replace($needle, $replacement);
$str = $str->preg_replace($regex, $replacement);
$str is scalar, NOT and never an object. and there's no auto
boxing/unboxing, no properties, as no "new String()" (to make php-dev
please)
=========
wish about lamda function constructor:
having to write a callback at far away, and use it in
preg_replace_callback, make writing/maintain code harder
function callback_1($matches) {
}
other callbacks here....
$str = preg_replace_callback("/../", "callback_1", $str);
$str = preg_replace_callback("/../", "callback_2", $str);
etc.
using create_function() is
1. quite confusing as the code has to be in string
2. might also lead to code injection as eval().
3. cannot be cached/optimized by apc or so. (md5 the whole code string
as a key?)
$start = ..
$end = ..
$str = preg_replace_callback("/../", "callback_1", function ($matches) {
return $start . $matches[1] . $end;
});
is really nice.
but "scope" in such function need to be discussed. accessing variables
of parent function inside lamda(child) function is useful most of the
time.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
