Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:31655 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 86967 invoked by uid 1010); 16 Aug 2007 20:59:01 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 86951 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2007 20:59:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Aug 2007 20:59:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=helly@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=helly@php.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: helly@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 85.214.94.56 aixcept.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [85.214.94.56] ([85.214.94.56:38643] helo=h1149922.serverkompetenz.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FB/42-06697-29AB4C64 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:59:00 -0400 Received: from MBOERGER-ZRH (unknown [216.239.55.7]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C839B1B3622; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:35:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:35:09 +0200 Reply-To: Marcus Boerger X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <99377057.20070816223509@marcus-boerger.de> To: Stanislav Malyshev CC: Guilherme Blanco , Marc Gear , Sebastian Bergmann , In-Reply-To: <46C485C9.7000507@zend.com> References: <46BE14B1.5050209@zend.com> <101178402.20070814174515@marcus-boerger.de> <6094eac50708150709o6d1fe42bx3449af2bc1b7f54d@mail.gmail.com> <46C337F4.5080001@zend.com> <6094eac50708160540w4828a72aka2264dc69c69903@mail.gmail.com> <46C485C9.7000507@zend.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Renaming namespaces to packages] From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger) Hello Stanislav, Thursday, August 16, 2007, 7:13:45 PM, you wrote: >> Read the purpose of both, which restrictions/limitations both have, >> how are they defined, how are they used, etc and you'll see if the >> current implementation is more like 'namespace' or 'package'. It's not >> related to package Java, namespace C, def, zendspace of whatever. > That's what I am trying to explain for a week now and still failing. Wrong!!!! You started to defend the current state with a non existing JS feature. And then you found a wiki page. Wow now wiki is the all-knowing-trash-dump? > Namespace as a concept is not the same as implementation of namespaces > in C++ or Java. Packages as a concept is not the same as implementation > of packages in Java, Perl, C or PHP. PHP is neither C++ not Java. > Choosing which language to mimic - Java or C++ - is not the right way to > think about the problem. PHP is separate language, not C++ or Java. Just > because C++ has + and PHP has + doesn't mean PHP should have operator > overloading. Just because PHP has multi-component names and Java has > multi-component names doesn't mean namespace definition operator should > be the same keyword. That's what I'm trying to explain - the choice is > not "should we be like C++ or like Java". We may end up being like it - > or not, but it is not the choice we have. So going with existing expectation is good or bad? And then if there are two things, The concept and the implementation. Wouldn't it make sense to not use the marking relevant one in the implementation and instead use package in the implementation as that is what we are implementing. At least when looking at the code and its behavior. And then use the damn word 'namespaces' in PR material? Oh and don't forget your namespace wiki matches both concepts. The concept of namespace in existing languages (with nesting and stuff) and the package stuff which is limited to one per file. Best regards, Marcus