Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40354
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fmethod.com from 69.16.228.148 cause and error)
Message-ID: <C9086588FDF041E691EFC05124F1F232@pc>
To: "PHP Developers Mailing List" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <ADD0525F-F900-4F3A-9B76-1ED332CA31E0@pooteeweet.org> <486FA5FB.1000300@php.net> <E06A1FB3-971F-4D4F-850A-D0255F7275F7@pooteeweet.org> <DA45DD81F95A480C9EACB6932C6F93F4@pc> <48C56140.7040102@zend.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:39:02 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: towards a 5.3 release
From: sv_forums@fmethod.com ("Stan Vassilev | FM")

> Hi!
>
>> So I'd say, make it explicit and remove the vague moment.
>
> Do I understand right that you advocate having to use ::Exception each 
> time you need the internal class?

As I said:

"I heard lots of objections how ugly it is to prepend everything with "::" 
(not
that this is the only possibly syntax), but it increasingly is becoming
apparent that the automatic resolution is bound to have either bug-prone or
performance issues, so why introduce a "trap" in the language that people
will continuosly fall into?"

In other words: everyone is saying that "for those of us who need 
performance or avoid resolution problems, can use ::, and the rest..." --> 
who are those the rest, which don't care about performance and resolution 
problems?

What is YOUR suggestion? Just tell us how hilarious it is to type "::" and 
introduce all the other problems anyway.

Furthermore, the "::" (or rather I'd make it "php::") would only be required 
in a namespace. For the procedural folks which don't put code in a 
namespace, they're already implicitly in "php::" so they can continue 
writing things exactly like thay do now.