Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:38627 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 32064 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2008 07:38:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Jun 2008 07:38:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.94.239.7 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.94.239.7 mail.jdi-ict.nl Linux 2.6 Received: from [82.94.239.7] ([82.94.239.7:54973] helo=mail.jdi-ict.nl) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CE/B2-13482-E6743684 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:38:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.jdi-ict.nl (8.13.7/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m5Q7cGfe027790; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:38:16 +0200 Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:38:16 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: derick@kossu.ez.no To: Rasmus Lerdorf cc: internals Mailing List In-Reply-To: <48610D08.2030604@lerdorf.com> Message-ID: References: <485BD1C0.8040302@chiaraquartet.net> <48610D08.2030604@lerdorf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] simple solution to another namespace conundrum? From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > Derick Rethans wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote: > > > > > it won't be a serious 'wtf', as on the top of the file, there > > > would be some kind of use MySuperLibrary::DateTime; > > > > I know, but 400 lines down in the code you can't really see that. > > This addition might fix the immediate issue - but it doesn't make > > life easier for the developers that have to maintain the code. Even > > less if they're not aware that stuff is namespaced. > > If we don't allow it to work this way, then I really don't see the > point in namespaces at all, which I assume is the point you are trying > to make. Actually, the point that I was trying to make is that we instead of encouraging this confusion, we should put somewhere in our userland nameing guidelines that you still would need to provide a prefix to your (aliased) classnames in order to prevent confusion. But that then seriously means I see no real good reason still why people want namespaces with confusing resolving rules (concerning static methods like Greg points out). regards, Derick -- Derick Rethans http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org