Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35654
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:01:27 +0100
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <1016146449.20080220210127@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Jochem Maas <jochem@iamjochem.com>
CC: Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net>, php@stefan-marr.de, 
	internals Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <47BB41F1.40607@iamjochem.com>
References: <001c01c87264$3c01b4e0$b4051ea0$@de> <1203453089.24580.12.camel@localhost> <1615703844.20080219214224@marcus-boerger.de> <47BB41F1.40607@iamjochem.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Traits for PHP
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Jochem,

  good arguments. And good ideas. I'd favor 'posesses' then.

marcus

Tuesday, February 19, 2008, 9:54:09 PM, you wrote:

> firstly, I'd like to reiterate the general sentiment
> that Stefans RFC is blinding! (that's a good thing in this context ;-)

> Marcus Boerger schreef:
>> Hello Lars,
>> 
>>   we could even go for include here if we wanted to avoid use as much as
>> adding a new keyword. Personally I don't mind using keywords for different
>> stuff as long as it cannot conflict. That is in this case true for both
>> include and use.

> how about 'possesses' or 'exhibits' - both these words are closer to the
> natural language usage of 'trait' with regard to a subject.

> John exhibits a **** trait
> Jack possesses a **** trait

> a person coming accross 'use' or 'include' in the context of
> trait attribution may either make assumptions or become confused as to
> possible changes/additions to the use and/or include functionality, a
> new keyword that aptly describes the intention will more likely force
> users to actually find out what it means.

> an another alternative might be 'applies' - which doesn't fit the
> natural language usage of 'trait' but does succintly describe what is happening.

> just a thought.

>> 
>> marcus
>> 
>> Tuesday, February 19, 2008, 9:31:29 PM, you wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Stefan,
>> 
>>> Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:27 +0100 schrieb php@stefan-marr.de:
>>> [...]
>>>>  class ezcReflectionMethod extends ReflectionMethod {
>>>>    use ezcReflectionReturnInfo;
>>>>    /* ... */
>>>>  }
>> 
>>> I'm not sure if the use-keyword is a good idea as namespaces are already
>>> "used". If we use "use" for traits, maybe going back to "import" for
>>> namespaces would be the way to go.
>> 
>>> cu, Lars
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>>  Marcus
>> 




Best regards,
 Marcus