Can you breaking change a PSR like this? I don't think it's wise to do a complete reversal in a PSR like this would be.
Personally, I *just* refactored some small, unimportant projects to use the suffix. In any way shape or form I sincerely hope you don't implement a "breaking change" to a PSR like this. On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 3:53:26 PM UTC-4, Matthieu Napoli wrote: > > Hi all, > > This is a 2 weeks discussion before going to a vote. > > The "Interface" suffix has been questioned a few times already, I'm > suggesting we put that up to a vote and avoid future debates. Here are > relevant threads I could find on the topic: > > - https://groups.google.com/d/topic/php-fig/Zgfd0gHUUoc/discussion > - https://groups.google.com/d/topic/php-fig/dPwtKqO3Zqk/discussion > - https://groups.google.com/d/topic/php-fig/10lM-UNudvU/discussion > - https://groups.google.com/d/topic/php-fig/aBUPKfTwyHo/discussion > > Suggested change: *replace "MUST" to "MUST NOT" in "Interfaces MUST be > suffixed by Interface"* from > http://www.php-fig.org/bylaws/psr-naming-conventions/ > > I do not suggest accepted PSRs are changed. > > Please share your reasons to vote FOR or AGAINST the change, let's debate > for 2 weeks or more, and then let's have a vote to settle this. > > Discussion will last for at least 2 weeks (20:40 UTC on 29 August 2016). > > --- > > Here are my arguments to vote FOR the change: > > *- the Interface suffix makes simple names very long* > > For example with PSR-7, here is the signature of a Slim/Zend Expressive > middleware: > > public function __invoke(ServerRequestInterface $request, ResponseInterface > $response, callable $next) : ResponseInterface > > { > > } > > > Compare that to: > > public function __invoke(ServerRequest $request, Response $response, callable > $next) : Response > > { > > } > > > The last one is much simpler and clearer. Typing and reading the first one > is a huge pain. This point applies of course to all PSRs, not just PSR-7. > > *- the Interface suffix makes the interface a detail and the > implementation the main thing, it should be the other way around* > > We should care about the interface, not the implementation. Type-hinting > against LoggerInterface means that "Logger" (the implementation) is still " > *the* logger", and the interface is a secondary concept that we > explicitly inject for decoupling. > If "Logger" was the interface, it would be even more obvious that the > interface is the most important part. The implementation is secondary and I > don't even care how it's named. I just want a logger and that's what the > interface is. > > Regarding the inconsistency it would create between PSRs I think it's > nothing compared to what we would gain in terms of developer experience. > > Matthieu > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/84a1442f-9a5a-42e8-ae8e-5b8be2fb6ce0%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
