Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39942
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pooteeweet.org from 88.198.8.16 cause and error)
Cc: Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net>,
 Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com>,
 Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>,
 internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <D2E02683-76AF-43F9-8EFE-7BDB297F8BA8@pooteeweet.org>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
In-Reply-To: <48A36617.5010803@lerdorf.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:00:21 +0200
References: <909776579.20080803142659@marcus-boerger.de> <840985F2-A701-4BE4-91F6-F6B39048CF9B@pooteeweet.org> <48A09FF4.1030101@zend.com> <7f3ed2c30808111411t51553771j389f05c3436bc625@mail.gmail.com> <48A0C415.9090104@zend.com> <e666c3890808111702m5e95e83kc3b15afbf4cef99d@mail.gmail.com> <48A0D579.2000000@zend.com> <e666c3890808111721y25e21e32v2836897793a60822@mail.gmail.com> <48A0DBAE.2010401@zend.com> <e666c3890808111804j566024baqac63576276d969b5@mail.gmail.com> <496879481.20080812153636@marcus-boerger.de> <279600845.20080812225135@marcus-boerger.de> <1218621323.4926.1.camel@localhost> <1341995942.20080813152134@marcus-boerger.de> <1218634532.4926.5.camel@localhost> <1714092517.20080813194342@marcus-boerger.de> <48A32817.4020105@zend.com> <10910129111.20080813213721@marcus-boerger.de> <48A33D86.1010806@zend.com> <59637275.20080813221213@marcus-boerger.de> <48A34180.8070601@zend.com> <0D64C8C4-2136-4D6B-9EBD-B5956C3044FC@pooteeweet.org> <48A36394.2040408@chiaraquartet.net> 
 <48A36617.5010803@lerdorf.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Inconsistencies in 5.3
From: mls@pooteeweet.org (Lukas Kahwe Smith)


On 14.08.2008, at 00:54, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:

> Gregory Beaver wrote:
>> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>>> On 13.08.2008, at 22:18, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>>>
>>>> Simply include a script from two locations with different  
>>>> namespaces
>>>> or one
>>>>> with namespace and the otherone without.
>>>> I'm afraid you misunderstand how namespaces work. As I explained
>>>> numerous times, namespaces are file-local, and this when including
>>>> file, it does not matter a bit what was including context.
>>> I think Marcus is talking about files that are included that do not
>>> specify a namespace explicitly. In this situation the context does  
>>> matter.
>>>
>>> We do not know if the developer in question is aware that the  
>>> context
>>> would matter in this case. Actually like I said in a previous  
>>> email it
>>> would be nice to at least not throw a warning if the file that is
>>> included specifies an explicit namespace (I assume that is  
>>> possible?).
>>> Maybe adding a new "include" is a solution. This way developers  
>>> can say
>>> explicitly what they want to do without having to suppress the  
>>> warning.
>>> Then again quickly some smartass developer is going to teach  
>>> people that
>>> these annoying warnings go away if you just use this new include
>>> everywhere. Then again, I am not sure if I even have my head wrapped
>>> around this entire namespace thing.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Currently, if you include a file within a class method that contains
>> function definitions, they remain functions outside the class.  If  
>> you
>> include a file that contains a class.
>>
>> In short, only global cpde is executed in the scope, and there is no
>> precedent in PHP to redefine re-usable elements based on scope.
>>
>> Why would namespaces be any different?  This whole argument makes no
>> sense to me.
>
> Well, it depends how you view the scope.  If you include a file that  
> defines a variable from within a function or a method, that variable  
> becomes function-scoped, not global.  In the case of a namespaced  
> function or method including a file containing functions or classes,  
> those classes become global.  That has, of course, always been the  
> case, but we haven't had the concept of a namespace context before  
> and we haven't had anything that was file-scoped like this.  So  
> people might extrapolate from the function-context case to this and  
> assume the wrong thing.  That's what Marcus' patch it about.
>
> I happen to disagree with him and I think we should just write  
> really good docs explaining how namespaces work and provide a lot of  
> examples.


My previous comments were wrong. Sorry about causing confusion. As  
Rasmus points out what Marcus is trying to solve with the warning is  
the false expectation that something that is included in a namespace  
would also be namespaced. This is not the case. As such if you want  
the included code to be in some namespace you have to explicitly do so  
in the file that is being included.

As such I also agree that we do not need a warning. It will do at  
least as much harm to legitimate uses as it tries to solve for  
illegitimate uses. And those problematic users will hopefully decide  
to read out docs ..

regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
mls@pooteeweet.org