[PHP-DEV] convention about function naming II From: André Langhorst (waldschrott <email protected>)
Date: 12/17/00

I have searched through almost all extensions and discovered the
following things:

1)
a) is it proposed that experimental extensions *always* have to prefix
their names and ought to put an EXPERIMENTAL file into their folder?
if not I think it would make sense

b) is anywhere defined if ext_* or ext* is the preferred naming,
currently both are mixed up, I find ext_* more readable

c) I would suggest not to use very long function names to make people
angry eg. "filepro","ingres","opensll","ovrimos","satellite" - I
personally prefer using "fp","ingr","ossl","ovr" or "sat" is there any
convention about this?

2) unconventional function naming caught:

a) ctype - already mentioned in README that the author (Harmut) does not
know if adding a prefix or using C-Names is preferable, I think both are
valid

b) exif - read_exif_data (only one function)

c) sockets

andré 

-- 
· André Langhorst       · t: +49 571 3201801 ·
· waldschrott <email protected>   · m: +49 173 9558736 ·
· PHP Quality Assurance · http://qa.php.net  ·

-- 
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe <email protected>
For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help <email protected>
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin <email protected>