Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:30958
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.146.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=e2XJJs0amhC+LESET5RtEprlVlj7xAYbSq7Qz/iDaGbk8a+Bk0XrLzWuCD7K9CyHEzP1Ob+VUJe0s4h97X/sLhQ/fpWIp+sGT1t7BUiUFNql6Q8zG2FkoFHmiFyBBR8Aq1tlZKrFCLLAyn/BOLuoE3b/cLGJHSEn8u+PiJ+QzrQ=
Message-ID: <3d1a63d10707160001p64eff2fdy3fa1707679a5d05b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:01:35 +0300
To: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <469AD3F8.40109@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3d1a63d10707150624y2b166f33y1bf3f628aba596b2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <469AD3F8.40109@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Simple Namespace Proposal
From: d.giedrius@gmail.com ("Giedrius D")

On 7/16/07, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:
> > The other thing that bothers me is namespaces nesting. It was said
> > that namespaces
> > nesting is not supported. Then I'm missing a point in having namespace
> > named "A::B".
>
> The same reason some people write $a = f($z, $t) and some write
> $parsed_template = template_parser($template, $data_values) :)
>
I wasn't talking about a short/long names :-)
I was talking about a separator inside a namespace name.

> > Lets say I have three files:
> >
> > a.php:
> > <?php
> > namespace A;
> >
> > function foo()
> > {
> > }
> > ?>
> >
> > b.php:
> > <?php
> > namespace A::B;
> >
> > function bar()
> > {
> >    //foo();
> > }
> > ?>
> >
> > index.php:
> > <?php
> > require 'a.php';
> > require 'b.php';
> >
> > import A;
> > foo(); // should call A::foo(), right?
> > B::bar(); // will this call A::B::bar()?
> > ?>
>
> import A is a no-op. You do import A::B and then you can do B::bar.
> import N means "something that is named N can now be referred only by
> it's 'last name' last(N), last name being last segment of the long
> name". If you have short names, you don't need namespaces, but if you
> have names like PEAR::DB::Record::Type::Modifier::Exception, you
> probably do :)
>
> > Now if this does not work then whats the point in having namespace
> > "A::B" instead of "A_B"? IMHO this brings more confusion then
> > clearness.
>
> The point is you can a) omit namespace prefix inside namespace and b)
> use just B (or C if you wish) instead of A::B outside, once you did
> import. As I said, with long names it makes sense, with short ones you
> are OK without it.
a) I was talking about namespace name "A_B" not class/function name.
b) So as far as I understand "import" doesn't actually *import* names
from specified
namespace to the current one but just renames long namespace name to a
shorter one. And if I get it right the separator in the namespace name
is allowed
and required only to express default name when importing without "as".
Am I right?


Regards,
Giedrius