On 07.11.2018 at 16:14, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
> Now on the convention, is there any reason why single underscore (_) is
> used instead of double underscores (__)? We already have __autoload,
> __sleep, __toString, __wakeup, etc.
There is no convention at all. The ini directive opcache
>
> Now on the convention, is there any reason why single underscore (_) is
> used instead of double underscores (__)?
Are you talking about _preload()? I guess this is just an example userland
code in the RFC, not a new internal or magic method.
Hi,
Besides the yet-another naming convention, I'm quite optimistic about this
RFC.
Now on the convention, is there any reason why single underscore (_) is
used instead of double underscores (__)? We already have __autoload,
__sleep, __toString, __wakeup, etc.
Regards,
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 11:
