Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:32847
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.187 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=OOsX9NTro3wDxhx+50SHigLrRxgTS9dEkE4m9c/kfzqy66Wqq+2NJbl4p618AK2BY1WETGhK7IMJldUbALsUcNcMI9Vj2dKPEduHyBnctsTNbh7srVDd1WIJt6BsFOh96iB9eRNqrEH/Jur9cZUYS8B6uBb0WU93r4E9csvS2Ss=
Message-ID: <fe05d1540710180308m17409206ibade2a7942afe609@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:08:12 +0200
To: "Andi Gutmans" <andi@zend.com>
Cc: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>, "Sebastian Nohn" <sebastian@nohn.net>, 
	"=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?=" <johannes@php.net>, 
	"Sebastian Bergmann" <sb@sebastian-bergmann.de>, 
	internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CECC6469@us-ex1.zend.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <fdohj3$bul$1@sea.gmane.org>
	 <1191237850.2903.19.camel@johannes.nop>
	 <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CEB9528E@us-ex1.zend.net>
	 <4701E210.70109@nohn.net>
	 <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CEB954E9@us-ex1.zend.net>
	 <8c631e020710171158n25b5efedt4eccf7d816331407@mail.gmail.com>
	 <47166930.7000706@zend.com>
	 <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CECC6469@us-ex1.zend.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] T_IMPORT vs. T_USE
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre)

On 10/18/07, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote:
> Main problem I have right now after digging deeper is that any such "fix" in the parser will mean that tokenizers and syntax highlighters will not treat keywords like "import" correctly. Fixing this would require them to do parsing which in many cases you don't want to do. There are a lot of utilities and tools which depend on such behavior.
> Even if it's just for this reason it may be better if we stick to the "a keyword is a keyword" rule and don't try and outsmart ourselves (other languages like C have discovered the same issues and stuck to the keyword only rule too). So it may make most sense to go ahead and use "use".

If we stick to this rule, we can't add new keywords in minor/patch
versions. (x.y+1 or x.y.z+1) as it break BC. With import, a lot of
codes is affected even if they use "import" as method name (said
already, add symfony to the list).

I really don't care about use or import but for what I see, import is
going to break (as said already) a lot of apps/codes out ther (add
symfony to the list).

I would prefer Stan's patch to allow keyword to be used as
class/method/function name. At the very least (the patch has
unsolvable issues), I have to agree with Andi, we should just go with
"use" (codesearch returns less than 10 results :).

Cheers,
--Pierre