Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:32977
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain leedsmet.ac.uk designates 160.9.128.18 as permitted sender)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:52:57 +0100
Message-ID: <93ED589E60BA254F97435FE6C97F2C672DE14C@leedsmet-exch1.leedsmet.ac.uk>
thread-topic: [PHP-DEV] Re: import/use last call
thread-index: AcgVpt1USABgD0lyQCinSrLoc8IjlABPNSBg
To: "PHP Internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: import/use last call
From: M.Ford@leedsmet.ac.uk ("Ford, Mike")

On 23 October 2007 19:57, Gregory Beaver wrote:

> Giedrius D wrote:
> >=20
> > Anyway my main question was: is there any reason not to use
> keyword "use"?
> The only reason for me is that "use" implies some kind of autoloading,
> as I suggested in one of my other mails.

H'mm, that's interesting. As I think I've said before, for me "use" implies=
 using something that's already sitting around waiting to be used, whereas =
"import" suggests an actual "go fetch" action, such as include/autoload (an=
d then using the result). I think I'd be slightly confused by a "use" that =
does an autoload and an "import" that doesn't. ;)

Cheers!

Mike

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------------
Mike Ford, Electronic Information Services Adviser,
JG125, The Headingley Library, James Graham Building,
Headingley Campus, Beckett Park, LEEDS, LS6 3QS
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 113 812 4730         Fax: +44 113 812 3211


To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to http:=
//disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm