On Thursday, August 18, 2016 at 3:31:16 AM UTC-5, Daniel Plainview wrote:
>
> Also, you wouldn't be allowed to have poor naming like Foo implements
> FooInterface. It looks like naming impotence: you have implementation, why
> you can't describe what makes this implementation specific: MySqlFoo?
> MemcachedFoo? ZendFoo?
>
Are you saying that every PSR-7 implementation is using poor naming
conventions because they define:
class Request implements RequestInterface { ... }
It sure seems like it. What should these be named? GuzzleRequest,
DiactorosRequest? So then we'd have:
namespace Zend\Diactoros;
use Psr\Http\Request;
class DiactorosRequest implements Request { ... }
This is effectively back to using the Abstract prefix, except with a vendor
name. Is that really a win for anyone?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/8d77b1d5-b5b9-4198-bad8-a47b4412714d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
