I agree completely. Can't we just call the damn thing DateTime stick it into RC1 of PHP 5.2, and move on?
Andi > -----Original Message----- > From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 7:25 PM > To: John Coggeshall > Cc: Andrei Zmievski; Steph Fox; Greg Beaver; Andi Gutmans; > 'Derick Rethans'; 'Edin Kadribasic'; 'Dmitry Stogov'; > internals@lists.php.net; 'Ilia Alshanetsky' > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PEAR::Date broken (Was: [PHP-CVS] > cvs: php-src(PHP_5_2) /ext/date php_date.c php_date.h) > > > Sure, but let's get some perspective as well here. We are > talking about > 1 class here with a naming problem that needs to bridge the > gap between 5.x and 6.x at this point. We are not going to > be adding dozens of new internal classes before 6. We may > very well be able to just call it DateTime and be done with > it. Calling it Date will mess up existing installs since it > would force them to upgrade PEAR which we know will be a > hurdle for many and I don't really think DateTime is in any > way a worse name than Date since the code does way more than > just handle dates. > > -Rasmus > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
