Maugrim_The_Reaper wrote:This is always a danger - but mind the ZF is still on its preview path. Once they hit 1.0 such changes should be reasonably rare.
I have to disagree...I've worked with and on many frameworks which change file structure through their lifetime. So unless PHP is magical or the Zend developers can see into the future...it's not the best approach to solving the problem.
Mr Potatoes wrote:i think you over analyze everything in your framework
I'm anal about everything I do...why do it period if you don't do your best or obsess about every detail? I get that characteristic from my old man who is an air craft mechanic. Personally I'd prefer people who were anal about every detail fixing the air plabnes on fly rather than those who let details pass them by, either by complacency or ignorance. Would you?
Maugrim_The_Reaper wrote:If API changes in your framework are a worry, I would check into Refactoring to limit its impact - am I stating the obvious here?
Ummm...yea just a bit...but by refactoring...you are making more work for yourself and a framework is suppose to do just the opposite...but I too am stating the obvious, so I guess were in the same boat...
Arborint wrote:Are you saying that PEAR style naming "hardens
I don't remember saying anything about PEAR, but perhaps I did
Arborint wrote:Are you referring to having to do two search-and-replaces rather than one?
Yup
So are you advocating that PEAR naming is better
Again I don't remember mentioning PEAR at all
I'm not advocating anything, other than I'm sure there is a better method or approach which makes more sense...
What am I saying is that file structure will change undoughtedly (100% gaurantee for any project that lives past version 1.0). What I am saying is that once your file directory changes and you update the class names (if you chose to do so) would be a hassle, not for framework developers so much but for clients using your framework. So really both parties are effected.
I thought I made my concerns pretty clear? So what part of my point didn't you get?
Are you implying that Zend naming scheme is the best way?
Personally after some thought, I would tend to disagree.
1) Classes will change as well as their directory locations...maybe more in the beginning...but change is perpetual. Everytime you refactor the directory tree, you need to refactor your code as well as your clients...
2) IMHO using __autoload() as a debug function informing you of when and where your includes choked and allowing a dynamic file structure *might*be a better way of doing things.
I am not advocating Zend is better than PEAR or visa versa...I will say I personally prefer Zend over PEAR...PEAR is more of a library whereas I see Zend as a framework.
Cheers
