Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20812
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:06:19 +0100
Message-ID: <00A2E2156BEE8446A81C8881AE117F192C1D5D@companyweb>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] Basic Namespace Requirements
Thread-Index: AcX0Z8XPjODJiN5rRBCOP56I75w37QAa51Rw
To: "Jessie Hernandez" <jrhernandez05@gmail.com>,
	<internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: AW: [PHP-DEV] Basic Namespace Requirements
From: mp@webfactory.de ("Matthias Pigulla")


> Von: Jessie Hernandez=20
> So, the question is, can we scrap both namespace constants=20
> and namespace functions and just stay with classes (as was=20
> agreed on several months ago, Andi himself agreeing to it)?=20
...
> I think this is the best solution thus far. If any one of you=20
> still feels a need for constants/functions, PLEASE show me a=20
> _valid_ example that cannot be accomplished by just simply=20
> putting the constant/function inside a class in the namespace.

Bart de Boer came up with a good reason for them so I'd like to re-post
his statement.

<quote>
Namespace constants can be handy if you'd want to include some library=20
that uses predefined constants and classes that might conflict with=20
other classes and constants in the script.

namespace someLib {

include('huge_conflicting_library_that_I_dont_want_to_reverse_engineer')
;

}
</quote>

Of course, that would not only require to put defines [=3Dconstants?] =
and
functions in namespaces, but variables as well.

namespace X {
 	var $foo =3D 1;
	function bar($p) {}
}

X::bar(X::$foo);

which can, of course, not easily be distinguished from static class
members.

So is the whole "include-legacy-stuff-into-namespace"-approach beyond
the scope of what you're trying to do?

-mp.