Everything

php

last Tidy api changes

php.internals

Nuno Lopes

22 years ago

Hello all,

I'm currently documenting the Tidy extension and I've noted that John has
changed the API in PHP 5.
He changed all is_xxx to isXxx. This makes Tidy 1 and 2 (PHP 4 and 5)
complitely imcompatible.

I don't see any advantages in changing the API. And I prefer the is_xxx
form....

Is it possible to revert this change, please?
(http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php-src/ext/tidy/tidy.c?r1=1.35&r2=1.36)


Thanks,
Nuno

Derick Rethans

22 years ago

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Nuno Lopes wrote:

> I'm currently documenting the Tidy extension and I've noted that John has
> changed the API in PHP 5.
> He changed all is_xxx to isXxx. This makes Tidy 1 and 2 (PHP 4 and 5)
> complitely imcompatible.
>
> I don't see any advantages in changing the API. And I prefer the is_xxx
> form....
>
> Is it possible to revert this change, please?
> (http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php-src/ext/tidy/tidy.c?r1=1.35&r2=1.36)

No?

Derick

Marcus Börger

22 years ago

Hello Nuno,

The point is that we discussed this very long and came to the conclusion
that all php5 oo extensions should follow studlyCaps convention in their
method naming. Hence this will not be changed again.

Saturday, February 21, 2004, 12:16:24 PM, you wrote:

> Hello all,

> I'm currently documenting the Tidy extension and I've noted that John has
> changed the API in PHP 5.
> He changed all is_xxx to isXxx. This makes Tidy 1 and 2 (PHP 4 and 5)
> complitely imcompatible.

> I don't see any advantages in changing the API. And I prefer the is_xxx
> form....

> Is it possible to revert this change, please?
> (http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php-src/ext/tidy/tidy.c?r1=1.35&r2=1.36)

> Thanks,
> Nuno

--
Best regards,
Marcus                            mailto:helly@php.net

Nuno Lopes

22 years ago

> Hello Nuno,
>
> The point is that we discussed this very long and came to the conclusion
> that all php5 oo extensions should follow studlyCaps convention in their
> method naming. Hence this will not be changed again.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Marcus                            mailto:helly@php.net
>

I think that the is_xxx form is more readable, but as my opion doesn't
count.... I think this rule should be applied only in new
functions/extensions.

If you really decide not to change this, thats more work to me.... :) The
documentation will become more confusing, but.....


Nuno

Andi Gutmans

22 years ago

At 11:54 21/02/2004 +0000, Nuno Lopes wrote:

> > Hello Nuno,
> >
> > The point is that we discussed this very long and came to the conclusion
> > that all php5 oo extensions should follow studlyCaps convention in their
> > method naming. Hence this will not be changed again.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >  Marcus                            mailto:helly@php.net
> >
>
>
>I think that the is_xxx form is more readable, but as my opion doesn't
>count.... I think this rule should be applied only in new
>functions/extensions.
>
>If you really decide not to change this, thats more work to me.... :) The
>documentation will become more confusing, but.....

I think Tidy is new enough so that this BC break will affect very few.

Andi