On 9 June 2010 16:28, Hannes Magnusson <hannes.magnus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 18:56, Philip Olson <phi...@roshambo.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 8:11 AM, G. T. Stresen-Reuter wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 3:47 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are several features in PHP that are "not implemented [yet]", 
>>>> including roughly 13 DOM classes. Well, they are sorta (but not really) 
>>>> implemented.
>>>>
>>>> How should we deal with this?
>>>
>>> Just my 2¢ but if something is not (yet) implemented, it doesn't exist and 
>>> thus shouldn't be referenced in any end-user documentation.
>>>
>>> I could never tell my clients about x functionality unless it is, well, 
>>> functional! Doing otherwise could be interpreted as being less than honest.
>>
>> I mostly agree but the trouble is (as seen in the examples) this stuff is 
>> partially implemented. So in the least we should mention them as reserved 
>> keywords (at least, the new classes/methods). Or mention them in better 
>> detail somewhere, and offer alternatives (and/or allow users to provide them 
>> via user comments).
>>
>> I'm not sure the best approach to handling these concerns but am afraid 
>> people think "Oh, this is defined so  probably just isn't documented yet." 
>> which leads them down a time wasting confusing path of testing them out. We 
>> could prevent that, somehow.
>>
>> And in the future I don't think "not implemented yet" should be allowed in 
>> php-src.
>
> IMO it shouldn't and should be removed.

+1

>
> -Hannes
>

Reply via email to