On Wed, 2003-07-02 at 14:24, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 10:37 AM 2/7/2003 -0400, l0t3k wrote:
> >IIRC there was an informal consensus to use studlyCaps as the official
> >userland convention for OOP extensions (*) (leaving aside the case
> >insensitivity of the language.)
> >my question now concerns accessors. should we prefer properties over
> >propertyGet()/propertySet() accessor functions ? would having both
> >constitute bloat. i ask because im implementing a series of classes
> >mirroring those in the Caffeinated Language (tm) so familiarity could be an
> >asset.
> >
> >
> >l0t3k
> >(*) i wonder if this should be more formalized before the next major
> >release. major extensions like dom/xsl are already using the current
> >method->function_ name() convention.
>
This was formalized. studlyCaps were agreed upon. DOM adheres to the
DOM standard, so that's a special case. ext/xsl should be changed.
-Sterling
> I definitely prefer setXXX()/getXXX() functions over property overloading.
>
> Andi
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers stirring to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying
to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning."
- Unknown
