Everything

php

Log4P Project Class Names

php.internals

Will Fitch

19 years ago

Hello All,

I am continuing my Log4J implementation for PHP.  There are some naming
conventions which I am concerned will cause existing userspace class issues.
If you are familiar with Log4J, the following  example class names won't be
new to you:

Agent

Logger

Appender

Constants

FileAppender

And the list goes on.  I have attached a text file with all 1.4
specifications of log4j.  I considered log4p_* as a prefix for all class
names, but I am concerned for Java developers moving to PHP who are familiar
with the standard already in place.

If you have any insight into this issue, I would appreciate feedback.

Thanks,

Will Fitch

Zend
<http://www.zend.com/store/education/certification/authenticate.php?ClientCa
ndidateID=ZEND001989&RegistrationID=211155268>  Certified Engineer

Richard Lynch

19 years ago

On Wed, July 25, 2007 6:20 pm, Will Fitch wrote:

> And the list goes on.  I have attached a text file with all 1.4
> specifications of log4j.  I considered log4p_* as a prefix for all
> class
> names, but I am concerned for Java developers moving to PHP who are
> familiar
> with the standard already in place.

If we need another logging class, and if it's going to co-exist nicely
with other packages, I'd really recommend just using the log4p_*
prefix.

Anybody not bright enough to figure it out from the kind of
Documentation PHP is known for is already in much deeper trouble. :-)

I personally don't think any new PECL stuff should go in without some
kind of agreed-upon prefix.

And the PECL list is almost-for-sure the right place to take this,
come to think of it.

--
Some people have a "gift" link here.
Know what I want?
I want you to buy a CD from some indie artist.
http://cdbaby.com/browse/from/lynch
Yeah, I get a buck. So?

Will Fitch

19 years ago

I agree on both the naming convention (log4j_*), as well as the standard
naming convention.  There seems to be plenty of sources to suggest different
things, but no official declaration within PECL.


On 7/26/07, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, July 25, 2007 6:20 pm, Will Fitch wrote:
> > And the list goes on.  I have attached a text file with all 1.4
> > specifications of log4j.  I considered log4p_* as a prefix for all
> > class
> > names, but I am concerned for Java developers moving to PHP who are
> > familiar
> > with the standard already in place.
>
> If we need another logging class, and if it's going to co-exist nicely
> with other packages, I'd really recommend just using the log4p_*
> prefix.
>
> Anybody not bright enough to figure it out from the kind of
> Documentation PHP is known for is already in much deeper trouble. :-)
>
> I personally don't think any new PECL stuff should go in without some
> kind of agreed-upon prefix.
>
> And the PECL list is almost-for-sure the right place to take this,
> come to think of it.
>
> --
> Some people have a "gift" link here.
> Know what I want?
> I want you to buy a CD from some indie artist.
> http://cdbaby.com/browse/from/lynch
> Yeah, I get a buck. So?
>
>

--
Will Fitch
Zend Certified Engineer
931.205.8427