<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PHPDeveloper.org</title>
    <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org</link>
    <description>Up-to-the Minute PHP News, views and community</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 15:07:39 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[David Coallier's Blog: Namespaces part 4.1 (What namespaces don't fix (part 1))]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/8781</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/8781</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
<i>David Coallier</i> continuing his look at the upcoming namespace support in PHP, has posted some a bit more negative than some of his previous posts - this time it's about <a href="http://blog.agoraproduction.com/index.php?/archives/52-Namespaces-part-4.1-What-namespaces-dont-fix-part-1.html">what namespaces don't fix</a>.
</p>
<blockquote>
Anyways, after posting a few articles about namespaces and now that the patch has been ported to the php 5.3 branch, people are actually starting to use it. The side effects of people (without too much knowledge or thinking about the implementation of namespaces) is that they are actually realizing that namespaces are not the promised land.
</blockquote>
<p>
To illustrate his point, <i>David</i> gives something that namespaces just won't fix - long class names. It doesn't matter if you're using them in the Project_Package_Class or (with namespaces) Project::Package::Class format, you're still stuck with the long names. Keep an eye out for more similar articles from David to demystify other incorrect namespace impressions.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:36:00 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Ryan Malesevich's Blog: WP Plugins: WP-Chunk]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6124</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6124</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
<i>Ryan Malesevich</i> is back on his blog today with a look at <a href="http://ryanslife.net/2006/08/23/wp-plugins-wp-chunk/">another WordPress plugin</a> - WP-Chunk, a tool to split up large data so to conforms more to the page layout.
</p>
<blockquote>
Occassionally I'll have someone post a comment that includes a URL. Wordpress automatically links to that URL, but often times it's too large for the alotted space. So depending on the browser, it might break it entirely. <a href="http://johntp.com/">John</a> recently wrote about a plugin that would fix that problem. <a href="http://www.village-idiot.org/archives/2006/06/29/wp-chunk/">WP-Chunk</a> doesn't require much to work. There's no customization, or settings to change, it just works.
</blockquote>
<p>
His <a href="http://ryanslife.net/2006/08/23/wp-plugins-wp-chunk/">example</a> is of a long URL, but I imagine you could use it for any content that would cause the output of the post to expand out too far. And no configuration makes it even better!
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:32:19 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Michael Kimsal's Blog: PHP short tags/xml patch (AKA long live short tags!)]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4673</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4673</link>
      <description><![CDATA[On <i>Michael Kimsal</i>'s blog today, there's <a href="http://fosterburgess.com/kimsal/?p=26">this new post</a> with his method handling the "short tags" issue that plagues so many developers out there with a patch that makes it less of a problem.
<p>
<quote>
<i>
For years I've been seeing people try to get rid of PHP "short tags" - <? and <?= to be precise - and enforce "long tags" only. Not tying directly, but this seems to fall in line with people who like Smarty and other 'templating languages' instead of just using PHP itself for the 'templating' part. 
<p>
Well, last year I made a quick patch to prove that the XML tag conflict was something that could be taken care of at the PHP parser level. It worked, but I lost that patch. So, I put it together again and would like some feedback. It seems to work OK on my end, and I'd like to see if this is something that we could get some traction behind.
</i>
</quote>
<p>
He <a href="http://fosterburgess.com/kimsal/?p=26">gives the source</a> for the patch, a modification to one of the C files prior to compiling the PHP installation....]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:54:44 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
