Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:31571
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 66.249.92.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=ZQIyP6yAJjeTJQy9Le84hdHDJXP1YxB0akY2ykO9wA8TIKlz98Qepp0bBso+KwJSIkv1Dw9h21kzKm7RgJWUjyNbUangz/aHvV8tCAqfV0b9LswTlVcHCWjIzM4chu3pT9iiOoaHp3eoXEsOeOmojfl2nQ0g19Dd0MVZrum3gzs=
Message-ID: <b5f7bf6c0708141121w647531edq410857878a99c621@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:21:26 -0400
Sender: david.coallier@gmail.com
To: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>
Cc: "Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net>, "PHP Internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <46C1EB6C.8000601@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <46BE14B1.5050209@zend.com>
	 <101178402.20070814174515@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <46C1EB6C.8000601@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Renaming namespaces to packages]
From: davidc@php.net ("David Coallier")

On 8/14/07, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:
> > OO. And anyway, are we struggling to find excuses here? Can we in no way
> > ever at least try to be consistent in anything we do? That JS argument is an
>
> How "consistent" had acquired a meaning of "doing it my way"? There's
> nothing inconsistent in the name "namespace" and it is very consistent
> with what people understand - I quoted wiki on that. I'm still waiting
> for that non-"C++ does it with braces" argument btw.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
> stas@zend.com   http://www.zend.com/
> (408)253-8829   MSN: stas@zend.com
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

I am for package because:

- The keywords are actually the words used in similar technology as
such as java and python
- The single namespace per file is common to a package design but hey
- No hierarchical namespaces (within one namespace)
- I believe it will be easier to anyone who will be learning our
namespace/package to keep on going learning other languages. Since the
our implementation is very package like, it will not be so much
confusing for someone in C++ that will be using namespaces and will be
simple for someone coming from Java to use our package system (yet
less complex than java, thanks for that)

- For Stas (There are no brackets) :)
- Because no one can say "Do you have a patch?" since there is already
one made and ready to be applied.

I now stand as a spectator.

do I get a 2 cents or so ? :P

0x02 cents.

D