Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:129061
Message-ID: <63C06675-50E0-45C6-8ACF-D70590D84CCE@nicksdot.dev>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_B50531CC-DB2A-4B81-964B-F2A5FB689064"
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.700.81\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] use construct (Block Scoping)
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 12:16:26 +0700
In-Reply-To: <CAFyg4HhrzQrE-q8D6WVkyq9tY+hzR=8rXiXLDPYpNKdYeydrVA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
To: Seifeddine Gmati <azjezz@carthage.software>
References: <CAFyg4HhrzQrE-q8D6WVkyq9tY+hzR=8rXiXLDPYpNKdYeydrVA@mail.gmail.com>
From: php@nicksdot.dev (Nick)


--Apple-Mail=_B50531CC-DB2A-4B81-964B-F2A5FB689064
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii


> On 4. Nov 2025, at 04:46, Seifeddine Gmati <azjezz@carthage.software> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hello internals,
>=20
> Tim and I would like to open the discussion on our new RFC that we've =
been working on: "use construct (Block Scoping)".
>=20
> We wanted to raise a few initial points:
>=20
> The RFC proposes the `use` keyword. What are your thoughts on a new =
`using` keyword instead, similar to C# or Hack?
>=20
I think the three existing meanings of `use` are enough. A new keyword =
would be better.
But, if a new keyword, why not `scoped`?
> How do you feel about the questions raised in the "Open Issues" =
section?
>=20
B feels more intuitive.

Cheers
Nick=

--Apple-Mail=_B50531CC-DB2A-4B81-964B-F2A5FB689064
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=us-ascii

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii"></head><body style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><meta =
http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><div=
 style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
line-break: after-white-space;"><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" =
content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><div style=3D"overflow-wrap: =
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: =
after-white-space;"><br><div><div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>On 4. =
Nov 2025, at 04:46, Seifeddine Gmati &lt;azjezz@carthage.software&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><p><span style=3D"font-family: arial, =
sans-serif;">Hello internals,</span></p><p><span style=3D"font-family: =
arial, sans-serif;">Tim and I would like to open the discussion on our =
new RFC that we've been working on: "use construct (Block =
Scoping)".</span></p><p><span style=3D"font-family: arial, =
sans-serif;">We wanted to raise a few initial =
points:</span></p><ul><li><p><span style=3D"font-family: arial, =
sans-serif;">The RFC proposes the&nbsp;<code>`use</code>` keyword. What =
are your thoughts on a new `<code>using</code>` keyword instead, similar =
to C# or&nbsp;</span><span style=3D"font-family: arial, =
sans-serif;">Hack?</span></p></li></ul></div></div></div></blockquote><div=
><div>I think the three existing meanings of `use` are enough. A new =
keyword would be better.</div><div>But, if a new keyword, why not =
`scoped`?</div></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><ul><li><p><span style=3D"font-family: arial, =
sans-serif;">How do you feel about the questions raised in the "Open =
Issues" section?</span></p></li></ul></div></div></blockquote>B feels =
more =
intuitive.<br></div><br><div><b>Cheers</b></div><div>Nick</div></div></div=
></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_B50531CC-DB2A-4B81-964B-F2A5FB689064--