On 2011-06-07, dukeofgaming <dukeofgam...@gmail.com> wrote: > --0016e68ee3e4bc4b0e04a525bac6 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > +1 for "callable", it is really more consistent.
I was actually agreeing With David and Stas that "callback" was more consistent, and casting my vote for that. > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney < > weierophin...@php.net> wrote: > > > On 2011-06-07, David Z=FClke <david.zue...@bitextender.com> wrote: > > > On 07.06.2011, at 22:31, Stas Malyshev wrote: > > > > > callback is callable, the opposite could not be true. a string > > > > > --or a closure-- is callable, but the string is not a callback > > > > > > > According to our docs, which were out there for years, it is. One of > > > the main and widespread complaints about PHP is the lack of any system > > > in naming, design and documentation, it is sad to see how many people > > > want to make it worse instead of making it better > > > > > > +1. I'm thinking it should be "callback", or the docs should be > > > adjusted. "callable" arguably does make more sense, but either way, it > > > needs to be consistent, that's what matters most. > > > > Agreed, here. "callback" is the usage throughout the documentation to > > refer to anything that passes is_callable(). -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Project Lead | matt...@zend.com Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
