Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 02:10 PM 9/9/2001 +0200, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > Cleaning up a language is a benefit worth paying in price for. How many > > millions of lines of C code had to be re-written when the ANSI standard > > was published? > > Exactly none. ANSI preserves most K&R semantics and that > won'

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

It is no more obscure than a #define in a C file, which is the way this construct is most commonly implemented...but, as I said, "I would rather see [this]...than to see _() stay." I don't like it. But it is less offensive to me than _() is... On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote the fol

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

I agree. I think this two pronged appoach is the best way to satisfy everyone. >Let's do this alias thing, but lets also document _() for the sake of >those people that have never heard of gettext but need to maintain the >code. > >--Wez. >The world needs more engineers BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Joey Smith wrote: > I would rather see something to the effect of "use strict;" (as in > perl) that can be defined (per site/directory/namespace/SOMETHING...) > to mean "use gettext on all calls to print" than to see _() stay. now tell me how *that* isn't obscure if you happen to be looking at

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Egon Schmid wrote: > > Wez Furlong wrote: > > > So it's never going to collide with anything else > > You say that if you come across it and wonder what it does, the manual > > doesn't tell you what it is. Lets solve that by putting it in the manual. > > It is mentioned in the PHP manual. See

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 11/09/01, "Chuck Hagenbuch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > would be even happier if calling alias_function('gettext', '_') would simply > do nothing if _() already pointed to gettext(), but I won't quibble about > the function_exists() check. What about a language construct: function _ = gettex

Re: [PHP-DEV] delete (was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah)

*Phew* :) At 06:18 11-09-01, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: >Quoting Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Oh yummy, we have delete()?! > >Zeev: in this case, you can relax. From >http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.delete.php: > >This is a dummy manual entry to satisfy those people who are looking

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > So I'm all for removing _() from the gettext extension... but I think the > people who are so eager for this have a responsibility to make sure PHP has a > good option for user-aliasing of functions in place before it goes away. I think if something

[PHP-DEV] delete (was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah)

Quoting Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Oh yummy, we have delete()?! Zeev: in this case, you can relax. From http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.delete.php: This is a dummy manual entry to satisfy those people who are looking for unlink () or unset() in the wrong place. It's not actuall

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I would rather see something to the effect of "use strict;" (as in > perl) that can be defined (per site/directory/namespace/SOMETHING...) > to mean "use gettext on all calls to print" than to see _() stay. That would not provide the same functionality

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 04:37 11-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote: >To automatically generate lists of functions and/or a separate alias >list is no problem. The problem is the alphabetically sorting of lists >with the current DSSSL stylesheets. I hope Hartmut or Jouni will have >enough free time to play with it. Guys, Plea

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Oh yummy, we have delete()?! There goes our delete operator, but hey, what a nice little messy namespace do we have! It's gotta be worth it, it's so much shorter than delete_file() :) Zeev At 02:10 11-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote: >Wez Furlong wrote: > > > > What about delete()? > > Thats not even

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 01:30 11-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote: >Wez Furlong wrote: > > > So it's never going to collide with anything else > > You say that if you come across it and wonder what it does, the manual > > doesn't tell you what it is. Lets solve that by putting it in the manual. > >It is mentioned in the PHP

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Wez Furlong wrote: > > On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The _() alias is no function. If someone build-in gettext, he or she > > should read the gettext documentation. The manual can be only a better > > function reference and if every alias would have a description just

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Joey Smith wrote: > The point that *I* have been trying to get at is that this has *ALWAYS* > been a bad idea, no matter what langague you are using. > You all talk an awful lot about how _ decreases the "contextual > overhead". What I'm trying to express is that THIS IS BAD

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The _() alias is no function. If someone build-in gettext, he or she > should read the gettext documentation. The manual can be only a better > function reference and if every alias would have a description just like > the real functions, new

[PHP-DEV] openssl (was Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah)

On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > PS1: I'm editing openssl to fix some prototypes, so don't touch it in > the next couple of minutes. > PS2: Sorry, will start again after an update. Please be patient until > you see my commit. Too late... I'm done for now though. --Wez.

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 11/09/01, "Cristopher Daniluk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still, the option of > introducing runtime function aliases and/or compiler directives was brought > up. I personally prefer this solution, its not a bad idea for PHP to have > anyway, and gives users a ONE LINE solution, while giving

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Wez Furlong wrote: > > On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This dummy entry in the documentation was done by Kristian Kí¹¢í¾´opp If you don't use the ISO 8859-1 language I have to rewrite the name with: Kristian Koehntopp. > > because most Windows lusers wouldn't find the

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

sage- From: Wez Furlong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 8:21 PM To: Egon Schmid Cc: Wez Furlong; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This dummy entry in the documentation was done

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

c: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah What about delete()? Thats not even a real alias ? strpos and strchr? Let's put in the alias for _(); it removes the wtf factor. --Wez. > It is mentioned in the PHP manual. See http://php.net/gettext. We have a > convention, not to document a

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

by which PHP should behave. These apply to functions, not to things like regexes and http://www.dsnet.net/ -Original Message- From: Wez Furlong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 6:00 PM To: Joey Smith Cc: Wez Furlong; PHP Developer List Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 11/09/01, "Egon Schmid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This dummy entry in the documentation was done by Kristian Kí¹¢í¾´opp > because most Windows lusers wouldn't find the real unlink() function. > Sure it may be anoying some Unix users, but it is very helpfull for > Windows users because they a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

No, actually. I find syntax highlighting both annoying and distracting. I hope you're not terribly surprised by my answer. :) I would rather see something to the effect of "use strict;" (as in perl) that can be defined (per site/directory/namespace/SOMETHING...) to mean "use gettext on all calls

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Wez Furlong wrote: > > What about delete()? > Thats not even a real alias ? > strpos and strchr? This dummy entry in the documentation was done by Kristian Köhntopp because most Windows lusers wouldn't find the real unlink() function. Sure it may be anoying some Unix users, but it is very helpfu

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

What about delete()? Thats not even a real alias ? strpos and strchr? Let's put in the alias for _(); it removes the wtf factor. --Wez. > It is mentioned in the PHP manual. See http://php.net/gettext. We have a > convention, not to document aliases as a function. This means _() is > mentioned w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Wez Furlong wrote: > So it's never going to collide with anything else > You say that if you come across it and wonder what it does, the manual > doesn't tell you what it is. Lets solve that by putting it in the manual. It is mentioned in the PHP manual. See http://php.net/gettext. We have a co

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 10/09/01, "Joey Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would love if every C developer in the world would stop using this. I > doubt that's going to happen anytime soon...but at least I can voice my > opinion here, what people at least hear me out, if they don't exactly > *hear* me. :) I hear y

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

"Wez Furlong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "James Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:23 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah > On 08/09/0

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

The point that *I* have been trying to get at is that this has *ALWAYS* been a bad idea, no matter what langague you are using. You all talk an awful lot about how _ decreases the "contextual overhead". What I'm trying to express is that THIS IS BAD! gettext() is deep magic. When you are doing de

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2. Create a php config directive that allows you to do the same thing -1. Config directives are a huge headache for people who distribute code (and for projects like PEAR). Let's not encourage adding more of them, when there are much better solutions.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Wez Furlong wrote: > Are you really serious when you say that you want to deprecate _()?? > Just think how many of the "bigger guys" will be affected and seriously > pissed that their nicely localized enterprise application suddenly doesn't > work or drops its performance several notches ? > > Ye

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 08/09/01, "James Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that echo is used > a lot more so lets make echo aliased as ^(.) oh and perhaps we should > have sprintf as *() and dont forget while.. I bet perople get bored of > typing that so lets make it >(conditional expreesion) { .

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 08/09/01, "Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At least give the user the option to decide whether he wants to pollute his > namespace. At least give the code readers a chance to figure out what's > going on by grepping the PHP source code. Sending them to the C source > code or to

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On 08/09/01, "Cristopher Daniluk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Again, as mentioned before, this is suitable: > function _($string) { return gettext($string); } Yes, but if you use gettext on any large site, you will be using it a helluva lot; and this would slow it down. I would adopt this if the

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Joey Smith wrote: > > Ken, I whole-heartedly apologize for my rude statments...it is > simply a measure of my frustration with _() that led to me behave so > poorly, and I hope you'll forgive me. Thank you for apologising. Forgiven. :-) -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http:

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: > > Zeev: were it being added now, no, I wouldn't argue for it. > My argument is based on it having been there for years and > being in heavy use in some people's code. Likewise MHO. -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/ Author, develo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > Did/do you use gettext in other languages? > > No > > >If the answer to the latter, at least, is 'no' then I think the > >experience of people like Rasmus and Chuck -- who *do* use gettext > >a lot, and in other languages -- carries a helluva lot more weight > >than

Re: Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Ken - see my point? :) I have seen it all along. I just do not think that removing it is better than leaving it forever but discouraging it. And you cannot say that 'ugliness is not a metric' for anyone except yourself. Multiple people have brought that aspect up, so o

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

I didn't make any suppositions. I wrote two very simple benchmarking scripts and timed how long they took, as an attempt to measure the overhead of calling userland function aliases. You're welcome to come to whatever conclusions you want to based on this data. On Sunday, September 9, 2001, at 1

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Inc Unleashing Your Potential voice: 800/845-4822 web: http://www.dsnet.net/ -Original Message- From: George Schlossnagle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 9:57 AM To: Zeev Suraski Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Chuck Hagenbuch'; 'PHP Developer List&

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 16:57 09-09-01, George Schlossnagle wrote: >Replaced with a call to strstr and function declaration placed ahead of >usage (althoough I disagree about how much faster this will make it. I >only declare the function once and loop it, so whether >do_bind_function_or_class is called on it dur

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Uhm, no. Read my message again, it actually makes sense. At 14:56 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote: >Does this mean we can forget namespaces then? >Is this where we have come to: blackmail ? > >--Jani > >On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > >Fine. > > > >Let it be noted that I oppose going

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

/47.19 = 46.77 >>> >>> I really truly and with all my heart believe that if simply calling a >>> user >>> created function could drop performance by 25%, PHP would not be a >>> viable >>> language. Whether my results are accurate findings or not

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> Cleaning up a language is a benefit worth paying in price for. How many > millions of lines of C code had to be re-written when the ANSI standard > was published? Exactly none. ANSI preserves most K&R semantics and that won't change in the foreseeable future. - Sascha

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

>demonstration of a 26.3% performance decrease by CALLING A FUNCTION is a lot >>to swallow! >> >>Oh, and I'll refrain from making the muse that the latter test was faster. >> >>Having the user make their own function may not be the right solution for >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> >Inconveniencing your long-time users in the name of language purity > >is, IMHO, just plain stupid. > > To keep us from spiraling down the drain, I'll leave that one unanswered :) Oops. I already took us down that road. Ken, I whole-heartedly apologize for my rude statments.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

These are two of the most ridiculous statements I have *EVER* heard anyone make. Cleaning up a language is a benefit worth paying in price for. How many millions of lines of C code had to be re-written when the ANSI standard was published? And I'm not personally sure, but I'd be willing to bet th

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

ts phenomenally silly to argue that it would have a > large > performance impact! > > Regards, > > > Cristopher Daniluk > President & CEO > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > direct: 330/530-2373 > > Digital Services Network, Inc > Unleashing Your Potential > voice

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Rasmus Lerdorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > This doesn't mean I agree with the magic _() function, but until we have > some sort of efficient run-time function aliasing mechanism like they do > in Python, removing _() and telling people to create a user-space function > that calls gettext() is

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

agenbuch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 7:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'PHP Developer List' Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah Quoting Cristopher Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Agreed, but is the speed loss really worth crying about? Obviously not t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > We can add an E_NOTICE to it Oh, god, PLEASE don't do that. Some of us actually develop and run our personal sites (like the one I'm writing this mail with) with error reporting set to E_ALL. It's good coding practice, helps me write clean code, and if

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Cristopher Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Agreed, but is the speed loss really worth crying about? Obviously not to you, but I'm pretty sure you came down in the category of people who'd never used gettext. > It is negligible calling a userspace function versus an internal compared to >

Re: Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 12:46:17AM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Fact - gettext(foo) is much less magical and much more understandable > than _(foo). I think the problem here is that internationalization is being considered a 'separate module', rather than a core piece of functionality that PHP

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> At 01:24 09-09-01, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > > >Exactly the same goes for > > >one-line footnote on the php.net/echo page. > > > > > > So that's a documentation bug. It clearly belongs in the documentation > > > about PHP's various special tags, just next to > > language="php">, etc.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 01:24 09-09-01, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > >Exactly the same goes for > >one-line footnote on the php.net/echo page. > > > > So that's a documentation bug. It clearly belongs in the documentation > > about PHP's various special tags, just next to > language="php">, etc. There's a logi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> >Exactly the same goes for >one-line footnote on the php.net/echo page. > > So that's a documentation bug. It clearly belongs in the documentation > about PHP's various special tags, just next to language="php">, etc. There's a logical place to look for that entry. FYI, 'I' added http://ww

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 19:29 08-09-01, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > At 09:36 08-09-01, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that > we don't > > > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > > > > > >You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbi

Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: Chuck Hagenbuch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah > >On Sat, 08 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Again, by deprecating it now, the immediate action would be removing any > > reference to it from the documen

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > just like _() is a concession to gettext users. And http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/ Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/ -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> At 09:36 08-09-01, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we don't > > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > > > >You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbied against it forever. > > Well, you did in certain oc

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

, September 08, 2001 11:48 AM To: Cristopher Daniluk Cc: 'Chuck Hagenbuch'; 'Joey Smith'; 'PHP Developer List' Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah On Fri, 07 Sep 2001, Cristopher Daniluk wrote: > Again, as mentioned before, this is suitable: > > function _($strin

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

age- From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 9:29 AM To: PHP developer list Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah * On 2001-09-08 at 08:34, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say: > > Not really. You only have to conf

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On Fri, 07 Sep 2001, Cristopher Daniluk wrote: > Again, as mentioned before, this is suitable: > > function _($string) { return gettext($string); } > > once in your code. Voila, now you can still have your short cut, and we can > still have our consistent naming structure. Sure, it would be an a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

On Sat, 08 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Again, by deprecating it now, the immediate action would be removing any > reference to it from the documentation (the very little there is). There > are a hell of a lot PHP users to come than there are existing users of PHP, > so we might as well lim

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Just to add my few £0.02 to this discussion :) _() just doesnt make sense to anyone who hasnt used gettext() which tbh is probably the vast majority of the comunity, I have seen _ in the function lists and Zend and Harmuts site and just thought it was a querk somewhere.. _() to me looks like some

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 16:37 08-09-01, Jim Jagielski wrote: >Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we > don't > > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > > > > You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbied against it forever. > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 16:28 08-09-01, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: >This sort of argument keeps coming up, but Zeev is the lucky one >who sets me off.. :-) > >People are very free to speak about what *others* expect. Unless >you are one of them, or have concrete evidence, then such remarks >are nothing more than s

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we don't > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > > You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbied against it forever. > However, sometimes you need to conform with the under

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

* On 2001-09-08 at 08:34, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say: > > Not really. You only have to conform if you believe that PHP is not a > standalone language. You're also assuming that most of PHP's userbase has > C background, which is usually not true. Among th

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

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 <[EMA

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

[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 i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 10:24 08-09-01, Emiliano wrote: >Well, I was torn between accepting it as sarcasm, and getting hints on >how to accomplish it :) > >Totally impossible? Totally. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-m

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 09:36 08-09-01, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we don't > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > >You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbied against it forever. Well, you did in certain occasions, but

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

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. Disappoin

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > reuse. We can get back to the idea of letting people define % as > > > htmlspecialchars(), > > > > You can do that in PHP? How? > > You can't. You missed the dripping sarcasm. Well, I was torn between accepting it as sarcasm, and getting hints on how to accomplish

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Zeev Suraski wrote: > > At 05:40 08-09-01, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: > >It's the kind of thing that gets used a lot in HTML, where otherwise there > >wouldn't be a function call at _all_ - just static text. Replacing gettext() > >with _() in this case actually does improve readability, in my opinion

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > That's fine and dandy, except gettext() is just one way to internationalize > > a site, and there are all sorts of other functionalities people use and > > reuse. We can get back to the idea of letting people define % as > > htmlspecialchars(), > > You can do that in P

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Zeev Suraski wrote: > That's fine and dandy, except gettext() is just one way to internationalize > a site, and there are all sorts of other functionalities people use and > reuse. We can get back to the idea of letting people define % as > htmlspecialchars(), You can do that in PHP? How? E

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

> Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we don't > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. You know I hate magic more than most. I have lobbied against it forever. However, sometimes you need to conform with the underlying 3rd-party mechanism you are c

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

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. -Andrei -- PHP Development Mailing List

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

27;; 'PHP Developer List' Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah Quoting Cristopher Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > But I think the point is this function has no business in the core language. It's not in the core language. It's in the gettext extension. -chuck -- "I have po

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Cristopher Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > But I think the point is this function has no business in the core language. It's not in the core language. It's in the gettext extension. -chuck -- "I have pointy little boobs!" - Jason -- PHP Development Mailing List T

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

MAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:56 PM To: Joey Smith Cc: PHP Developer List Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Did it occur to you that people who *DON'T* use gettext() frequently > have to maintain the code of those who

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Did it occur to you that people who *DON'T* use gettext() frequently > have to maintain the code of those who do, and that _() isn't going to > make one lick of sense to them? Given the suggestion to just have people who already use gettext to define f

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Speaking only for myself and not Chuck, I would say, "This is > a decision that was made 2.5 years ago. It may have been > the wrong decision then, but it is a waste of time second-guessing > it now. Keeping similar things from happening is

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Did it occur to you that people who *DON'T* use gettext() frequently have to maintain the code of those who do, and that _() isn't going to make one lick of sense to them? On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote the following to Joey Smith : > Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > No

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > No, I haven't, but let me get this straight: > > You're saying that if something is a bad idea, that the more often it is > used, the "less bad" [1] it becomes? Uh, no. I was just pointing out that it's been around for a long time, and is used in a lot

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

* On 2001-09-07 at 23:42, Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say: > > No, I haven't, but let me get this straight: > > You're saying that if something is a bad idea, that the more often it is > used, the "less bad" [1] it becomes? Speaking only for myself and not Chuck, I

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 06:30 08-09-01, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: >Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > So let's be the first ones to get our heads on straight and get rid of > > this ridiculous concept. It is, IMHO, one of the worst ideas in the > > history of the world...I'd really rather be reading perl regul

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

EMAIL PROTECTED] direct: 330/530-2373 Digital Services Network, Inc Unleashing Your Potential voice: 800/845-4822 web: http://www.dsnet.net/ -Original Message- From: Chuck Hagenbuch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:30 PM To: Joey Smith Cc: PHP Developer List Su

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

* On 2001-09-07 at 23:40, Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say: > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote the following to PHP...: > > > Um, it has been around since sometime in version 3. Have you > > noticed it before? Has it bothered you? > > Yes, it bot

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

No, I haven't, but let me get this straight: You're saying that if something is a bad idea, that the more often it is used, the "less bad" [1] it becomes? [1] Yes, I know this is improper...but think about it in context. I'm trying to illustrate the point. On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Chuck Hagenbuch wr

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Yes, it bothers me. If it stays, I suppose I'll accept it, but it is such a horrendously bad idea that could easily be done in user-space insteadthis is *NOT* the kind of thing that should be encouraged on a language level. On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote the following to PH

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

Quoting Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > So let's be the first ones to get our heads on straight and get rid of > this ridiculous concept. It is, IMHO, one of the worst ideas in the > history of the world...I'd really rather be reading perl regular > expressions than this. I know that backwards

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

* On 2001-09-07 at 23:06, Joey Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say: > > So let's be the first ones to get our heads on straight and get rid of > this ridiculous concept. It is, IMHO, one of the worst ideas in the > history of the world...I'd really rather be reading perl regu

RE: [PHP-DEV] Woah

s Network, Inc Unleashing Your Potential voice: 800/845-4822 web: http://www.dsnet.net/ -Original Message- From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:47 PM To: Chuck Hagenbuch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah At 05:40 08-09-01, Chuck H

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 05:38 08-09-01, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > Using obscure single character operators is simply something that we don't > > do in PHP, it's totally inconsistent with the language. > >Except when it is a known and standard concept. I don't remember ever coming up with an improved version of the 'D

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

At 05:40 08-09-01, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: >It's the kind of thing that gets used a lot in HTML, where otherwise there >wouldn't be a function call at _all_ - just static text. Replacing gettext() >with _() in this case actually does improve readability, in my opinion. That's exactly what I said -

Re: [PHP-DEV] Woah

So let's be the first ones to get our heads on straight and get rid of this ridiculous concept. It is, IMHO, one of the worst ideas in the history of the world...I'd really rather be reading perl regular expressions than this. On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote the following to Zeev Suraski

  1   2   >