Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124752
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <USzt7tZZlO1DmAbSTLhD-bqa23FqZn0zk2aah8Ndxgk9c7RY5PefQ8MjbYPUYAzr2_m4Cf-5AI4PuNBTS84rim_FNS6RaT-cWSv714HEvvU=@gpb.moe>
 <1a88918e-e808-d778-45e1-53797660e093@php.net> <CAPrKfG5Cw_nU7g7FR+t4C1-YZ8CDsDO_-sRs=yEsHO5kCTZL+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <c03eb187-bd21-4a4b-9faf-8d0243eaa994@varteg.nz> <aa6bc7aa-28d9-40ca-974f-65075adb6199@rwec.co.uk>
 <3563cf9b-8eab-4c82-b525-a5d2f9a767bb@varteg.nz> <38920A4B-790D-48C7-B2F6-C49D3F506232@rwec.co.uk>
 <0824789d-0e36-4628-85c1-4b8d9b7f86af@varteg.nz> <ab8c974a-c31c-4ff6-974d-0a8c962d5e22@app.fastmail.com>
 <2244a37f-8c51-448d-8a56-329ff32e6470@bastelstu.be> <AE6EAAFA-3E8F-4B7C-877F-D84FBA8178C5@newclarity.net>
 <fc46131c-9f12-4601-b197-f4d66b79f2f8@varteg.nz> <D748C182-20C0-4BE4-859E-FBE86BB93524@newclarity.net>
 <0e1a21ddef3c7da17a3539b92d5f442763f4b1f8.camel@ageofdream.com>
 <CAPyj-LD02XrZ4F6ZqG0PNLrrfekBHiiz+S24v5nv_9xgW4UKUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5f1da5195e2aea7ec41e95ff4354f50b1717d3cf.camel@ageofdream.com>
 <CAPyj-LDhFFv=B-324YZDUv8BdV8npj6npLn9jxv3reA9SoGjqw@mail.gmail.com> <a97242032874e73480c2883e23745a1691ff261a.camel@ageofdream.com>
In-Reply-To: <a97242032874e73480c2883e23745a1691ff261a.camel@ageofdream.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:01:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPyj-LC4-euT3ddEXMUv8jdOONrtFu16se4zZ38yrt+oaA845g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Add Directive to Make All Namespaced Function
 Calls Global
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: tovilo.ilija@gmail.com (Ilija Tovilo)

On Sun, Aug 4, 2024 at 8:41=E2=80=AFPM Nick Lockheart <lists@ageofdream.com=
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > But that's not quite what the RFC says:
> >
> > > I am asking that we discuss and vote on the following question:
> > >
> > > =E2=80=9CShould there be some way for developers to signal to the par=
ser at
> > > compile time that all unqualified function names found in a
> > > namespace context are global, without a namespace lookup?=E2=80=9D
> >
> > Which implies:
> >
> > 1. There is _some_ change to syntax.
> > 2. All unqualified calls become global.
>
> I did not intend for all unqualified calls to become global, unless the
> new directive is present.

Sorry, my language was not precise enough. Your proposal suggests
making unqualified calls global when the directive is present, whereas
my proposal suggests keeping local scope as a fallback, hence the two
not being compatible.

What I'm saying is that:

1. If the vote fails, it might have been because some people don't
want opt-in behavior. Niels just voiced this opinion.
2. If the vote is accepted, it would void my suggestion, because it is
not compatible with the conditions laid out in your proposal. If this
were a straw poll, rather than an RFC vote, it would be clearer that
there is no mandatory approach or policy being accepted.

A vote with multiple options to pick an approach (opt-in through some
directive, hard BC break, flipping lookup order, nothing at all) might
be more appropriate.

Ilija