On 10/03/15 20:44, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: >> > YES there is room to create a more consistent procedural interface, but >> > my original question still applies "consistent with what rules?" > > It's possible choice. > I agree that names without "_" looks more consistent. > Personally, I don't care much about having "_" or not for procedural API. My > only concern is naming consistency. > > Names without "_" changes basic coding rule. > Problem is how to make a choice and how to define exceptions. e.g. > nl_langinfo() > > I wonder how many of us prefer names without "_".
The one thing that your RFC demonstrates perfectly is just how much has to change to match that rule. Change the rule and the number of names that need alternatives is considerably less. I know a case was made at the time for adding underscores to the guidelines but it's quite clear that this was the mistake? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
