Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121166 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 69995 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2023 21:21:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 28 Sep 2023 21:21:52 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A9E1804C1 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2023 14:21:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_NEUTRAL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS30827 82.113.144.0/20 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from xdebug.org (xdebug.org [82.113.146.227]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2023 14:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (host81-154-234-151.range81-154.btcentralplus.com [81.154.234.151]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67A5810C4D1; Thu, 28 Sep 2023 22:21:51 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 22:21:49 +0100 To: internals@lists.php.net User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41A81D98-63F2-43AD-BB3C-44CBF8E7BE3C@php.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] proc_open() resource to opaque object migration From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) On 28 September 2023 21:19:47 BST, "M=C3=A1t=C3=A9 Kocsis" wrote: >Hi Everyone, > >I'm writing in connection with a question coming up lately during the >"resource to opaque object migration" project ( >https://github=2Ecom/php/php-tasks/issues/6) which we have been working o= n >for quite a long while=2E > >During the review of my PR migrating the resource returned by proc_open() >to an object (https://github=2Ecom/php/php-src/pull/12098), it quickly be= came >evident that there was no consensus about the new class name, since the >originally proposed "Process" name has a non-negligible BC break likeliho= od=2E > >That's why we should find the best class name in accordance with Nikita's >namespace naming convention RFC ( >https://wiki=2Ephp=2Enet/rfc/namespaces_in_bundled_extensions)=2E Even th= ough my >PR currently implements "Standard\Process", this name is not a good >candidate according to the policy: > >Because these extensions combine a lot of unrelated or only tangentially >> related functionality, symbols should not be namespaced under the Core, >> Standard or Spl namespaces=2E Instead, these extensions should be consi= dered >> as a collection of different components, and should be namespaced accor= ding >> to these=2E > > >Does anyone have a good suggestion? > >Thanks, >M=C3=A1t=C3=A9 Yes, lacking evidence that the name is actually being used: Process PHP "owns" the top level namespace=2E This has been documented for decades= , too=2E=20 cheers Derick