Hi Michael, On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Michael Schuett <michaeljs1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Your evaluation is pretty anecdotal. I agree with some points but you need > some solid evidence if you are going to rate these languages. Also do you > have a list of all the functions you would like to rename or is this a > sweeping lets just change everything so it matches and deprecate all the > old stuff. Your matrix is a very weak push to do so. If you want to make > these changes it would be better to choose a select set such as the array > functions and try and push that through or see what that change might look > like and if it's really beneficial to userland. I agree that my evaluation is subjective. For example, I rate PHP has "1" security only because PHP is very weak against script/file inclusions because it's fatal and other languages apps do not have script/file inclusions as PHP apps do. Others might rate "2" or even "3" because it is too easy to fix it even if incident is fatal. (Security should be evaluated by "how difficult to make mistakes", not "how easy to fix mistakes" generally. IMHO) I made list of rename candidates https://wiki.php.net/rfc/consistent_function_names#list_of_functions_to_be_renamed If you have suggestions, I appreciate! Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net
