Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20840
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <93.24.14828.BC18C834@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:29:36 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00A2E2156BEE8446A81C8881AE117F192C1D5D@companyweb> <86.C0.14828.AB57C834@pb1.pair.com>
In-Reply-To: <86.C0.14828.AB57C834@pb1.pair.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Basic Namespace Requirements
From: bart@mediawave.nl (Bart de Boer)

I'm not sure I understand this problem. Isn't it doable to define 
defines at runtime and then put them under a certain namespace? I'm 
assuming namespaces are defined before defines?

Ideally, I'd say there should be no code limitations inside namespaces. 
But if this poses technical problems. Then I think using only classes 
under namespaces is better then no namespaces.



Jessie Hernandez wrote:
> Matthias,
> 
> Simply put, const != define. Like I think Sara mentioned before, defines are
> runtime-defined, and making it both compile-time/runtime defined based on
> context will be really confusing.
> 
> Also, I'm not accepting variables in namespaces and this is not needed
> either. So, yes, this is outside the scope of what I want to accomplish.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jessie
> 
> ""Matthias Pigulla"" <mp@webfactory.de> wrote in message
> news:00A2E2156BEE8446A81C8881AE117F192C1D5D@companyweb...
> 
> 
>>Von: Jessie Hernandez
>>So, the question is, can we scrap both namespace constants
>>and namespace functions and just stay with classes (as was
>>agreed on several months ago, Andi himself agreeing to it)?
> 
> ...
> 
>>I think this is the best solution thus far. If any one of you
>>still feels a need for constants/functions, PLEASE show me a
>>_valid_ example that cannot be accomplished by just simply
>>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
> that uses predefined constants and classes that might conflict with
> 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 [=constants?] and
> functions in namespaces, but variables as well.
> 
> namespace X {
>   var $foo = 1;
> function bar($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.