Tony Marston wrote:
"Skip Evans" <skip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:49723137.2010202@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself
with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone?
Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way
to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner.
Tony Marston wrote:
Absolute rubbish!
There's just no need to insult other list members like this.
Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling
him a moron would be, but I did not.
agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words
alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..)
Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive
than they could be.
And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular
programming style would be productive? I think not.
you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and
increase the scope where I can use php.
It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions,
What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you
think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the
way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs.
inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good
questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way
currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain
circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase,
yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my
productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some
of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently
make orm's for php such as the one in symphony.
lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less
experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists?
And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the
list entirely.
If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless
requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from
reading posts such as this which say "I'm used to language X, and my feeble
brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to
behave like language X?"
there you go with the feeble minded again tony..
a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes.
b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has
been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex
problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to
helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate
of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which
many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other
languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm
not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it
is, it's not - but it's a damn good language.
c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol
way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend
that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new
*optional* functionality.
PHP has support for objects and classes, right down to type hinting on
arguments, exceptions, inheritance, reflection the whole lot - to add in
the bits that are missing seems rather logical to me; thats why we've
got the OO features that already exist.
give me one good reason why optional type hinting / static typing of
class properties and normal variables would be a bad thing? and another
of how it would have any impact at all on you.
It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously
assumed superiority.
With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope
a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a
place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect.
Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that
would make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have
already written millions of programs with it. PHP is successful because of
the way it works, and changing the way it works, as suggested by the OP,
would not make it more successful. On the contrary, I think that it would
PHuck it up completely.
But that's just my opinion.
"make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have
already written millions of programs with it" - eh.. read tony;
OPTIONAL, this wouldn't have any impact or break any bc if done
correctly - just like typehinting on methods didn't..
php would work the same, just add in some *optional* functionality for
those who do need it, or would like to use it in parts of thier code.
jesus man, calling me feeble brained when you can't work out what
optional means.
better response? :p
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
