<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PHPDeveloper.org</title>
    <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org</link>
    <description>Up-to-the Minute PHP News, views and community</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:33:49 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Reddit.com: Let's Make PHP's Function Names Consistent!]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/19091</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/19091</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
On Reddit.com there's <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/174qng/lets_make_phps_function_names_consistent/">a heated discussion</a> going on in response to <a href="https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=52424">this bug</a> filed asking about aliasing PHP function names to make them more consistent (specifically "htmlentities_decode" versus "html_entity_decode").
</p>
<blockquote>
[...] Current naming conventions are really horrible. For instance, look at differences between str_replace, strlen, parse_str, htmlspecialchars. All work with same type but their names are completely different. So, string functions should go to String namespace (Stringreplace()), array functions to Array namespace (Arraysearch()) and so on.
</blockquote>
<p>
Back in the <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/174qng/lets_make_phps_function_names_consistent/">Reddit post</a> most of the commentors agree that this kind of thing would be beneficial to the language, but - as several point out - this could have serious backwards compatibility issues. What do you think? <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/174qng/lets_make_phps_function_names_consistent/">Voice your opinion</a>!
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:32:57 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[SitePoint PHP Blog: Good and Bad PHP Code]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/7924</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/7924</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
On the SitePoint PHP blog today, <i>Kevin Yank</i> <a href="http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/05/25/good-and-bad-php-code/">shares his thoughts</a> in the form of a list for what makes for "good" and "bad" PHP code.
</p>
<blockquote>
When interviewing a PHP developer candidate for a job at SitePoint, there is one question that I almost always ask, because their answer tells me so much about the kind of programmer they are. Here's the question: "In your mind, what are the differences between good PHP code and bad PHP code?"
</blockquote>
<p>
Among the items on the list for the good side are things like: structure, consistency, security, and portability. He gives a bit of example code that shows the three levels of "goodness" in a script (using $_GET variables).
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 09:02:00 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
