Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109740
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABdc3WoTeO4eTAoHCfqKyy8PWjrn97w9JXXhD88c3O9xPzp7QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEPJdukDAbNSjtS=VdjaMmUtA1fwN0eJ=EXKziTs3dgWUWZ4Rw@mail.gmail.com> <EDB49720-BC4E-4190-A3E5-66B765A770AD@newclarity.net>
In-Reply-To: <EDB49720-BC4E-4190-A3E5-66B765A770AD@newclarity.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:19:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CABdc3WpzQeCZgW6TSsYt5bT2ATMJ7OJ0+wDPSA=bvpnO-Vi6Yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net>
Cc: Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>, PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000086f13d05a3c7d8f7"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] PHP Namespace in core
From: michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Brzuchalski?=)

--00000000000086f13d05a3c7d8f7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Mike

wt., 21 kwi 2020 o 07:29 Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> napisa=C5=82(a=
):

> I have been wondering for a while why PHP does not officially recognize a
> \PHP namespace.
>
> The inconsistency people have mentioned feels like a fair tradeoff for
> allowing new core classes to be cleanly-named and easier to understand.
>
> And a \PHP namespace would allow RFCs to never need worry about
> conflicting with userland class names again.
>
> The one thing I would ask the authors:
>
> - Why limit it to "tightly coupled to the PHP engine?"
> - Why not just say "any new core classes that are approved to use it?"


In the past, there were some proposals which treated about core namespace
proposing to include most of the core symbols in a structured way.
These proposals always failed for some reason.

This proposal tries to convince internals to use PHP namespace in the core
for tightly coupled to the PHP engine types
which could be placed there without a risk to be unbundled in a future what
would cause a need to rename them back.
Therefore we think that these along with the arguments in the proposal are
the best ones to agree for now.

BR,
Micha=C5=82 Brzuchalski

--00000000000086f13d05a3c7d8f7--