Fine.
Let it be noted that I oppose going forward with any other clean-up of the
language namespace before this bug goes away. If we don't clean the
obvious ones, we might as well keep in everything.
(a very disappointed) Zeev
At 15:51 08-09-01, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
>[Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > At 09:13 08-09-01, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> > >At 05:33 AM 9/8/01 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > >>That's unfortunate. IMHO, it should be phased out.
> > >
> > > I'm against it. _() has been around forever as part of gettext
> > > package and people who expect to find it in PHP will be pretty
> > > disappointed.
> >
> > Disappointment isn't exactly the metrics here. People who migrate
> > from other languages will be disappointed not to find all sorts of
> > things they're used to from their old languages, but it has never been
> > a reason to obscure PHP.
> >
> > _() has no room in PHP's naming convention. There's a small downwards
> > compatibility issue (it's not advertised very promptly), so we should
> > deprecate it just like we deprecate and have deprecated other
> > functions in the past.
>
>Hey, let's just leave it, please. There's a zillion people who use
>this now, it's what they expect if they have used gettext before.
>It's been here for 2.5 years, it hasn't bothered anyone until now, and
>I don't think removing it would be anything less than counter-
>productive. Removing it would only make people alias _ to gettext
>themselves, net result being i18n'ed code running slower. It's not
>like we're going to add more single-character aliases, so I don't buy
>the feature creep argument either.
>
>L_A! (leave _ alone!)
>
> - Stig
>
>--
> Stig Sæther Bakken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Fast Search & Transfer ASA, Trondheim, Norway
--
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]
