Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> RC>> read (and comprehended) more easily, so the purpose of the
> RC>> function is less ambiguous. Without them, the name becomes less
> Please explain how presense or absense of underscore makes name more or
> less ambigious. I'm really lost here.
It's more legible for the same reason that it's easier (and faster) to read
"one two three" than "onetwothree". The human mind can easily tokenize at
the appropriate places, when it has a token. Without a token, the string
is much harder to parse.
Even StudlyCaps works the same way, as the "token" is based on the letter's
height.
For the very same reason that I use a space bar when typing email, I
use an underscore when a spacebar is inappropriate.
> RC>> Much of the time I already know the function names, I just don't know
> Huh? Tell me what function searches ldap database for a string without
> looking in the manual?
There's several, in order of use: ldap_connect, ldap_bind, ldap_search.
Without looking in the manual, I _don't_ have to guess if it's ldap_search
or ldapsearch. Which is my entire point. I know the ldap functions were
written with a consistent "word_word_word" scheme. Other extensions don't
use this, so I _do_ have to check back in a reference.
> Is it ldap_search? ldap_query? Now how do you get
> results? Is is ldap_get_result? ldap_fetch_result? ldap_get_row?
> ldap_get_value? ldap_get_values? ldap_read?
ldap_get_entries. (not ldapget_entries, not ldap_getentries, not
LdapGetEntries, not LDAP_getentries...(more on case and the docs below))
> More guessing? Did you already
> look in the manual? I bet you did. And underscores didn't help you.
I didn't check a manual. Ldap functions aren't named in a mixed fashion
of word_wordword and word_word_word. They follow the *most common* PHP
syntax of using word_word_word.
How having underscores helps is that I'm not guessing at whether or not
"the ldap function that gets entries" is named "ldap_get_entries" or
"ldap_getentries" or "ldapget_entries" or "ldapgetentries".
That's the point. I have an expectation that functions will be named
consistently, so I _don't_ have to RTFM each time I need to use a
rarely used function. Other function families are so mixed up that
I spend more time reading manuals.
> So, you propose to name GD functions image_gif instead of ImageGif and
> confuse all the users that were so unlucky as to have previous acquitance
> with GD?
Yes. Rename them, and deprecate the old ones, alias them, and remove
them much later.
To stop confusing the *language*, as a whole, we should be doing this with
some consistency, so we're not confusing people as they try to learn new
function names. They shouldn't have to guess, or read the manual, just
to figure out the "proper spacing" in invoking it.
Here's the current breakdown:
Apache: word_word_word/wordwordword.
Array: word_word_word
Aspell: word_word_word
BCMath: wordwordword
Bzip2: wordwordword
Calendar: word_word_word/wordwordword/WordWordWord
COM: Calendar: word_word_word/word_wordword
Classes/Objects: word_word_word
ClibPDF: word_word_word/word_wordword
Curl: word_word_word/word_wordword
Cybercash: word_word_word
Ctype: word_word_word
dba: word_wordword
dbm: wordwordword
Directory: wordwordword
DOM XML: word_word_word/word_wordword/wordwordword
Errrors: word_word_word
FilePro: word_wordword
Filesystem: word_word_word/wordwordword
FDF: word_word_word
FTP: word_word_word
Functions: word_word_word
Gettext: wordwordword
GMP: word_word_word
HTTP: word_word_word/wordwordword
Hyperwave: word_Word_Word/word_WordWord
ICAP: word_word_word
Image: WordWordWord
Imap: word_word_word/word_wordword
Informix: word_word_word/word_wordword
Ibase: word_word_word/word_wordword
Ingres: word_word_word
LDAP: word_word_word
mail: word_word_word
math: word_word_word/wordwordword
mcal: word_word_word
mcrypt: word_word_word
mhash: word_word_word
MSSQL: word_word_word
Misc: word_word_word/wordwordword
mnoGoSearch: word_word_word
msql: word_word_word/word_wordword
mysql: word_word_word/word_wordword
network: word_word_word/wordwordword
ODBC: word_word_word/word_wordword
Oracle 8: WordWordWord
openssl: word_word_word/word_wordword
Oracle: Word_WordWord
ovrimos: word_word_word
Output: word_word_word/word_wordword
PDF: Word_word_word/word_word_word/word_wordword
Verisign: word_word_word
Options/Info: word_word_word/word_wordword
Posix: word_wordword
PostgreSQL: word_word_word/word_wordword
Program Exec: wordwordword
Pspell: word_word_word
Readline: word_word_word
Recode: word_word_word
Preg: word_word_word
Ereg: word_word_word
Satellite: word_word_word/WordWordWord
sem/shm: word_word_word
SESAM: word_word_word/word_wordword
Sessions: word_word_word
Shmop: word_word_word
SWF: word_wordword
SNMP: word_word_word/wordwordword
Sockets: word_word_word/wordwordword
Strings: word_word_word/wordwordword
Sybase: word_word_word
URL: word_word_word/wordwordword
Variables: word_word_word/wordwordword
WDDX: word_word_word
XML: word_word_word
XSLT: word_word_word/word_wordword
Yaz: word_word_word/word_wordword
YP: word_word_word
Zlib: wordwordword
Ignoring case, the extension count, and the possible naming styles, is
as follows:
word_word_word: 65
wordwordword: 24
word_wordword: 21
Some extensions use more than one style, but the one most often
used is word_word_word. Many functions fit into word_word, which
is not affected one way or another by observing the most common
thread in naming.
The standard seems to already be in place.
-Ron
--
--2D426F70|759328624|00101101010000100110111101110000
Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 520-326-6109, http://www.opus1.com/ron/
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 520-546-8993, http://www.pnsinc.com/
The opinions expressed in this email are not necessarily those of myself,
my employers, or any of the other little voices in my head.
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
