Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:41016 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 23107 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2008 19:39:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Oct 2008 19:39:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=steph@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=steph@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 64.99.136.176 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: steph@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.99.136.176 smtprelay-virgin0176.hostedemail.com Received: from [64.99.136.176] ([64.99.136.176:42141] helo=smtprelay-virgin.hostedemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id D4/93-25867-B75F4F84 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:39:40 -0400 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (ff-bigip1 [10.5.19.254]) by smtprelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AB27D62FE5B; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:39:37 +0000 (UTC) X-SpamScore: 1 X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,bf412af06059a4a5,691ff1dea13fdf9b,steph@php.net,mls@pooteeweet.org:stas@zend.com:internals@lists.php.net,RULES_HIT:355:379:539:540:541:542:543:567:599:601:945:973:988:989:1155:1156:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1542:1587:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1766:1792:2073:2075:2078:2379:2393:2559:2562:2693:2828:3027:3292:3354:3622:3865:3866:3867:3868:3869:3870:3871:3872:3874:3876:3877:5007:6114:6119:6261:7653:7875:7903:9010:9040,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:none,DNSBL:none Received: from foxbox (62-31-252-63.cable.ubr07.shef.blueyonder.co.uk [62.31.252.63]) (Authenticated sender: steph.fox) by omf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:39:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <004801c92e34$d689ec30$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> To: "Lukas Kahwe Smith" Cc: "Stanislav Malyshev" , References: <652122.8719.qm@web708.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <48F4D832.7010708@zend.com> <033701c92e24$d9ca3d60$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4DF7E.1070202@zend.com> <038301c92e29$aa8f3aa0$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4E5B3.2030000@zend.com> <002201c92e2f$3c37f2d0$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 20:41:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-session-marker: 73746570682E666F78 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] namespaces and alpha3 From: steph@php.net ("Steph Fox") Hi Lukas, > We have 4 options. We know how things are without namespaces, we know how > things are with the current implementation. This essentially leaves 2 > choices that are untested for now. True, true. > Both of these approaches have some uncleanness to them. If functions and > constants get pushed to the global namespace while classes end up in the > current namespace on include it can lead to some surprises. At the same > time offering an ambiguous syntax to solve ambiguity when it occurs is > also not beautiful. If we try out one of them in alpha3 and are unhappy I > would not want an alpha4 to try out yet another one. But we will have the > alpha3 either way at this point. So we could say lets try out the one > that most people prefer for alpha3. If it sucks, we kick it out and move > on. Good thinking - but we'll still see the same arguments even if most of us think it sucks. > Then we can alternatively push it to PHP 6 or drop the idea all together. Dropping the idea altogether's unlikely to be an option now. > I know that Dmitry and Greg were both thinking over alternative > approaches, which did not yet come to a conclusion. Most of that revolves > around other separators between or around namespaces. So we can keep > cooking that. Yeah... I never had a response to ::: so I guess that one's been dumped out of hand somewhere off-list, but darn I hate -> reuse with a passion! > Namespaces have turned out to be insanely complex. However it seems to me > like most people that are voting are doing this on the basis that they > feel that the problem itself is not yet understood by Stas/ Dmitry. Far from it. It's more that Stas/Dmitry (and Greg) have invested a lot of time and thought into the implementation and all three understandably want to see their work 'out there', whereas I'm far from alone in thinking it's just not ready to be 'out there' at this stage. - Steph