Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21003 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 53254 invoked by uid 1010); 2 Dec 2005 13:31:32 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 53239 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2005 13:31:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Dec 2005 13:31:32 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 84.60.49.223 dslb-084-060-049-223.pools.arcor-ip.net Received: from ([84.60.49.223:12931] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 5C/86-14828-3BC40934 for ; Fri, 02 Dec 2005 08:31:32 -0500 Message-ID: <5C.86.14828.3BC40934@pb1.pair.com> To: internals@lists.php.net Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:31:26 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20.BA.56276.A1BC8834@pb1.pair.com> <7A.02.14828.9B9AF834@pb1.pair.com> <98.42.14828.81BAF834@pb1.pair.com> <438FD635.1080308@gmail.com> <14.27.14828.90EFF834@pb1.pair.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 84.60.49.223 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: namespace separator ideas From: oliver.graetz@arcor.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Oliver_Gr=E4tz?=) Jani Taskinen schrieb: >>This provided we support nested namespaces. Do we need them? >> >>JT>> No, we don't need no stinking namespaces. We already have prefixes. :) >> >>Did I write the word "nested" in invisible font? Funny, I didn't know my >>mail client supports it. > > Yes, but you don't have to think about "nested" if you forget namespaces. :) Nope. If you forget namespaces in that statement, then you have to think ONLY about "nested", meaning questioning "This provided we support nested." which sheds another light on this. Why forget about nesting here and not everywhere else? No more nested parentheses, no more nested for() loops, no more nested if(). That's braindead! The concept of being able to nest stuff is natural to programming. So, by trying to question namespaces at all, JT still answered the nesting question ;-) OLLi