[development] when we run out of characters

Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen freso.dk at gmail.com
Fri May 19 23:05:40 UTC 2006

2006/5/18, Khalid B <kb at 2bits.com>:
>On 5/18/06, Richard Morse <remorse at partners.org> wrote:
>>On May 17, 2006, at 7:20 PM, Jeremy Epstein wrote:
>>>I have another suggestion - and this time it's a serious one. How
>>>about changing it so that we literally put the word 'hook' into all
>>>hook implementations?
>>>So whereas now we have: function user_menu()
>>>Instead we would have function user_hook_menu()
>>I like this idea.  Extent code should be able to be fixed
>>programatically (we have a finite list of hooks), and this method is
>>self-documenting; it makes it clear which functions are hooks and
>>which aren't.
>I also +1 this idea which is better than mine (disallow underscore
>in module names).

+1 from me as well. Reasons already stated above.

>They are different solution though, one requires no work at all, and
>imposing the restriction in cvslog/project modules.
>The other requires changes to Drupal core as well as contrib (perhaps
>scripted ...)
>Depends on how severe we think this problem is, and whether it
>warrants change now ...

One could always make the change now to Drupal's code but still
support hook functions without 'hook' - possibly disallow them from
4.8 and onwards? (Ie., allow both the way it is now and hook_hook in
DRUPAL-4-7, and only hook_hook in HEAD - allowing people to migrate
easily without having to change too much to remain compatible between
4.7 and 4.8 (I don't know what the policy is on this generally, so
maybe it should only go in HEAD...).)

But then, I've only just stumbled upon the discussion save a few
tidbits I've picked up in #drupal - the above just makes sense to my
sleep deprived head as of this moment. :)

Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>

More information about the development mailing list