Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40603
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.14 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=aXNOAotxpj+1mgaO0oPwCpD/lTp1E/I7AVWcbprqFFodUZ2/aXPYVPNZEcXHyTk4a2
         3qmcwjJPPODmZ++ujoL/kHRwUaXfSs8DhCk7dtd6OjTXz1GDMM0GoRedEozBhcrEViwO
         eZMsq0KA5IXmkoUK+NxxLT+Efa6MjXrmpAUVo=
Message-ID: <cd5680a20809221042h5f0b4a1ci4b4083e4df32bc2f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:42:53 +0400
To: "Lukas Kahwe Smith" <mls@pooteeweet.org>
Cc: "Dmitry Stogov" <dmitry@zend.com>, "Gregory Beaver" <greg@chiaraquartet.net>, 
	internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <35BF242A-A479-4C8D-9137-0ED1B68109FE@pooteeweet.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <48D47532.8080102@chiaraquartet.net>
	 <e666c3890809200924t28f1c585kad77729dd608c5ad@mail.gmail.com>
	 <10845a340809201643q59e27211i471e09241f7253b1@mail.gmail.com>
	 <200809202000.38870.larry@garfieldtech.com>
	 <E5.0A.65213.536E5D84@pb1.pair.com> <48D66160.40306@chiaraquartet.net>
	 <48D79672.4060208@zend.com> <48D7A51C.9030805@chiaraquartet.net>
	 <48D7ADAE.5030500@zend.com>
	 <35BF242A-A479-4C8D-9137-0ED1B68109FE@pooteeweet.org>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] solving the namespace conflict issues between function/staticmethod class constant/ns constant
From: indeyets@gmail.com ("Alexey Zakhlestin")

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith <mls@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
>
> On 22.09.2008, at 16:37, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>
>>> Returning to the original debate, if you really believe this conflict is
>>> not an issue, then why was the first user note published last December a
>>> note about this conflict?
>>>
>>> http://us3.php.net/manual/en/language.namespaces.php#80035
>>
>> I could add nothing. The problem exists, but proposed solution make
>> language even worse. Having A::B->foo() and ->foo() or ::foo() and
>> A::B->C::foo() is much more inconsistent from my point of view.
>> It would be better to change static class separator from :: to ->, but
>> it's a BC break
>
>
> Again, not speaking as an RM, I personally feel we really do have to solve
> this ambiguity problem. I do not agree that this only affects "namespace
> abusers".
>
> That being said we have to stay realistic. What Greg proposes is realistic
> imho. Its essentially reusing an existing OO syntax. The same is what we
> have today with the double colon. While I agree that it would not be my
> natural choice, it seems it solves our real problem of the frequently
> mentioned ambiguity problem. So from that perspetive its a step forward from
> the current syntax.

The syntax proposed by Greg seems ok to me. While it is a bit
"unintuitive" at first, it is easily learnable and does it's work

> I know we are getting dangerously close (or are we already back in it?) to
> the namespace separator discussion. I remember back then a lot of people
> were saying lets get the implementation done first and then worry about the
> syntax. I guess we are more or less at this point now.

-- 
Alexey Zakhlestin
http://blog.milkfarmsoft.com/