| OT Re: part 2 - file exists not working [message #182964 is a reply to message #182957] |
Sat, 28 September 2013 18:33   |
bill
Messages: 310
Registered: October 2010
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You deserve respect and I am NOT trying to take that, or credibility
away from you. That said, I do have a couple of observations if you will:
On 2013-09-26 9:47 PM, Curtis Dyer wrote:
> Twayne wrote:
>
> [Twayne's quoted text below has been rewrapped]
>
>> On 2013-09-26 2:01 AM, Curtis Dyer wrote: ...
>>
>>> Arbitrary server admins don't determine when features of PHP
>>> become deprecated, the PHP development team does.
>>
>> Say WHAT? ... what makes you think that current servers, which
>> almost all offer at least TWO versions of PHP to its users will
>> stop doing that?
>
> None of what I wrote has anything to do with this.
You also didn't offer any enlightenment on what you meant, nor the
question.
If you are the author of the >>> comments above, then I think you did.
Or do you consider the word "Arbitrary" as an out? Or that there can
only be ONE meaning to PHP development team?
>
>> Some even offer THREE I've come across in the past. DEPRECATED
>> means removed from a VERSION of the language, not ALL versions!
>
> No, deprecated means that a feature or practice
(IN A VERSION OF THE APP IN QUESTION)
is considered
> dated in favor of something else, and that one should avoid using
> it, where possible.
Of course.
It is by no means a strict mandate that you
> must never use the feature. (Although, you obviously can't use the
> feature whenever you move to the new version in which a deprecated
> feature is dropped.)
That's a little obvious, too. But, unlike many, they are trying to say
that the latest versions with the deprecations is all that will suddenly
be available! It's just not true.
>
>> And just who is going to force server admins to have a dictated
>> version of PHP available and no other?
>
> No one, but I never wrote or implied anything like that.
>
>> It's myopic crap-thinking like that, that gets my attention
>> here.
>
> It's not a big deal. If you're writing new code, today, there's no
> reason not to avoid using the mysql extension. That's all. I'm not
> warning to toss away or fix old code *right now*.
Perhaps not; I don't take names as a rule and only respond to words
within a post. Most mail clients and readers should be able to aptly
show just who the response is/was to.
>
> And, if anything, it's myopic thinking to write code depending on
> a deprecated extension in situations where you don't need to.
Not if you don't intend to use that particular version yet. Change-over
will come slowly (it's been a slow boat from China so far) . Being
prepared and keeping track of the trends is definitely important. Anyone
with a site they value at all should indeed be keeping track of trends
AND where their server admin is; normally it's there to find.
>
>> And besides, mysql i isn't all that different from mysql,
>> period. It's just not the Armageddon arrival as some are working
>> so hard to point out.
>
> This is a ridiculous straw man.
No, it's not, really. I don't mean a couple of editor search & destroys
will fix it all up, but it's not that complex unless you have spaghetti
to start with. Actually, IMO, it's a bit simpler in many areas. I often
don't see the "why" of changes that are made, but then I'm not one of
the authors either. At the moment, the 'i' version doesn't offer me
anything I need and answers very few of my "wants". I really consider
it a natural progression of "life".
>
>> If you want to help, TEACH ; otherwise phase out.
>
> What do you mean? What do you think trying to inform people about
> best practices is all about? No one here is imposing mandates on
> anyone. We can just offer the best advice as we're able, and it's
> up to the OP and others who might read the advice to do with it
> what they will.
I mean, the chosen few who are pushing the line about change now or
suffer are not doing anyone any kind of assistance. Blind statements and
warnings without meat just aren't taken seriously. If one wants to
spread they word then they also include anm authentic, realistic link or
two to support their statements. So far I only recall one poster who did
that, but only after this prodding started.
>
>> Forget the vague warnings and scenarios of web sites not working
>> overnight.
>
> No one has written this. When I read Thomas's post upthread, for
> example, it read as a helpful aside to me. It was quite clear and
> concise. There's nothing vague about informing people about a
> deprecated feature.
Yes, it has been written and here in this thread. And I believe it IS
vague when one makes such a statement without any kind of reference to a
cite where factual information can be found.
>
> Again, no one has written that people's code will break overnight.
Yes, they have; at least twice it's been brought up, maybe more because
there are some posts I mostly skip over or don't even read like those
from stuckle; he's all troll and nothing more in my books now.
>
> <snip>
>
>>> When giving people advice about writing code, it's helpful to
>>> encourage the best possible practices. The mysql extension is
>>> indeed deprecated, and people learning PHP ought to be made
>>> well aware of this.
>>
>> True, and that should be your job;
>
> Usenet is not my job;
No, if you're going to participate on Usenet, forums or whatever, you
make it your job to be helpful and prevent erroneous impressions. If you
wish to be paid for it, then I'm afraid you're in the wrong place.
....
>
> It's a helpful warning and is intended to give people time to
> prepare however they choose. For some people, the concern probably
> isn't immediate. That's fine. However, there's absolutely nothing
> wrong with suggesting to beginners that they ought to use instead
> mysqli or the PDO MySQL driver.
Agreed
....
Regards,
Twayne`
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]