Hi, Friday, February 7, 2003, 10:45:31 PM, you wrote: AH> I don't think this is good idea. AH> date_sunset(), date_sunrise() are better.
AH> Andrey AH> ----- Original Message ----- AH> From: "moshe doron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> AH> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> AH> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:37 PM AH> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] new idate() - sunrise() - sunset() functions >> well, what about sun_set(), sun_rise()? >> >> moshe >> -- >> >> >> "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message AH> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> > At 12:47 PM 2/7/2003 +0200, moshe doron wrote: >> > >"Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> > > > I haven't been following this whole discussion. >> > > > However, the function names should follow the coding standards and AH> be >> > > named >> > > > something like date_sunrise(), date_sunset() (or whatever other AH> prefix >> > > > makes sense). >> > > > >> > > >> > >here is part of my replay to Leon Atkinson: >> > > > Also, shouldn't sunrise() and sunset() be cal_sunrise() and AH> cal_sunset()? >> > > > >> > >well, since sunset() & sunrise() have aspects more then cal_* related, AH> i >> > >thought the right place is standard. >> > > >> > >new astronomy extension, or linking against exisint lib, 'll be AH> overhead >> > >since i want use it on the calendar extension, that is build by default AH> on VC. >> > >> > Even functions in standard have a prefix. Only ancient ones don't and we >> > didn't fix them for BC reasons. >> > >> > Andi >> > >> time_sunset time_sunrise would make more sense :) -- regards, Tom -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
