Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:126811
Feedback-ID: id5114917:Fastmail
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 18:41:49 +0000
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: short and inner classes
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <AM8P250MB0170DE2A7E1AEE1FE1ED1F7CE2DF2@AM8P250MB0170.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <aae32397-0567-417f-adbe-6b663d5c49ae@app.fastmail.com> <CAO__Xv4END_NsATOGSnCArGuP_UmSpMxSMsSNPsQZnLooOWTsQ@mail.gmail.com> <3e4ba7ea-a154-452d-abfc-05ef1322fade@app.fastmail.com> <AM8P250MB0170DE2A7E1AEE1FE1ED1F7CE2DF2@AM8P250MB0170.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <C23E9229-503B-4359-9BA1-9ACBE0AA1ECE@rwec.co.uk>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: imsop.php@rwec.co.uk ("Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]")



On 17 March 2025 18:05:49 GMT, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail=2Ecom> wrote:
>I have not grasped any single argument in favour of \, except "other lang=
uages are doing it too", "existing tooling splitting on backslash would con=
tinue to work" and "we could use the existing use statement as is"=2E

This wording feels a bit disingenuous - clearly, you *can* grasp some adva=
ntages=2E It's fine if you don't think those advantages outweigh the disadv=
antages, but that's different from believing they don't exist=2E=20

In other words, it's like the famous Monty Python joke:

> All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, pub=
lic order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, wha=
t have the Romans ever done for us?



>Also, just because other languages are doing a mistake, it does not mean =
we have to repeat it=2E They are generally doing it because their identifie=
r separator is universal and it's consistent=2E It does not mean that it's =
without its own problems=2E


Absolutely, but where there's a wide adoption of a particular pattern or s=
tyle, it's worth at least asking whether we're making things better or wors=
e by doing something different=2E=20

If we look at that, and decide we can do something better, great!


>Using the double colon is a very minor BC break (accessing a class by a c=
lass constant value?! That's also quite inconsistent that it works at all, =
as you can't do that with normal constants, only class constants=2E)=2E
>Using another sigil would also be possible (like :>)=2E But for the backs=
lash I only see drawbacks=2E
>
>Also, nothing precludes us from allowing "use Foo\Bar::Inner;"=2E


Personally, I would be equally happy with either \ or :: and less happy wi=
th anything that required us choosing yet another set of punctuation, for w=
hat is otherwise quite a minor feature in its language impact=2E


Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]