[AppDB] CODING_STANDARD

[Jonathan Ernst]

By using superglobals we already achieved to have a better security and
a better readability. Now we easily know which vars are comming from
outside of the script ("parameters") and which vars are used inside the
script (this is only true if we don't copy superglobals in local vars
which is bad imo).

This is already a good thing. But now to improve it even more and make
it easy to know what a variable contains without having to read the
whole code that precedes it we could just tell the developer what it
contains by adding these thre letters to variables we use internally.
It's very nice to know at the first sight if we are dealing with an
array ([]) or an object for example.

As you said we sometimes use integer or string as booleans. As your
patches shows imo you also think it's a bad idea as we should use isset
or (if it's an integer) logical operators (if($i>2)). Using strings and
integers as boolean to know if they contain a value is bad as it can
lead to semantical errors (you never know, someday your database could
contain an entry whose id is 0 and then your if($id) check will be
wrong).

Migrating to superglobals already makes us add some more characters, why
don't we add some more for local vars too (but we don't need to rewrite
all the code now, it's just something we can keep in mind when rewriting
code or writing new code) ?

However if most of you think it just clutters the code and don't help
future AppDB hackers to read the code more easily we could just drop
this suggestion.


Jonathan


Le vendredi 24 décembre 2004 à 11:11 +0100, Paul van Schayck a écrit :
> Jonathan,
> 
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:43:45 +0100, Jonathan Ernst
> <Jonathan at ernstfamily.ch> wrote:
> > This patch sets variable naming convention that should be used in the
> > appDB code.
> 
> Why would we change it. I think it just clutters up the source without
> adding value. PHP is a variable-type decleration less language. We
> often just change string in booleans without thinking about it.
> 
> And I think I'm just lazy. I don't like typing more characters. What
> are your argument for it?
> 
> Paul
> 
>