On Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:13:02 +0200, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>
wrote:
The only thing I really dislike is the procedural API. The prefix
"intlcal_" is not very nice, but what I really doubt is the usefulness
of the procedural APIs for the Calendar resources. It makes little to
no sense to have it as it brings nothing in comparison to the OO
version.
I know we could have it to be consistent with other part of the intl
extension but ...
Well, it's mainly a matter of consistency. Every other part if the
extension exposes, at least, a procedural API, and most of the time also a
OO API. So having only an OO API would be unprecedented.
As for the usefulness, I agree it's very little, but the same could be
said of the OO API (though the procedural API is, in fact, object oriented
and the syntactically OO API is a better fit). Nevertheless, many people
actually prefer to use the procedural API.
In fact, including two APIs implies some non-trivial work, because you
have to declare the functions in two function tables, the arginfo must be
different, you have to test both, etc. But since it's already done, the
only issue is some extra memory and MINIT work required.
In sum, I don't think it hurts much and it helps the extension stay
consistent.
--
Gustavo Lopes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
