Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:41031
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.236 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=jWQw3aF4R0excgn0/KhIAIBv6JL4pCUxWkhpmMNrLtToX/6+XbPZhOkHFzKuPHUKQX
         SqiMDmvzhzk9FO5FzaWQEYax+JBhswk8Rp7D8SfrEap372sMoeYZqRrqq+xt0ycnIC7J
         pQao9UkM33dlH7baecCUODeV7We7WS1joG0hY=
Message-ID: <11c607a60810141401h6d69f5e3r6bd1f25cb07a58bb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:01:04 +0200
To: "Steph Fox" <steph@php.net>
Cc: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>, 
	"PHP internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <00e101c92e3c$d5194b90$3ffc1f3e@foxbox>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <696583.1217.qm@web707.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	 <48F4E520.5050200@lsces.co.uk> <48F4E824.7020104@zend.com>
	 <002901c92e2f$acdac990$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4F160.1040407@zend.com>
	 <004d01c92e35$20c9cbd0$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4F7EE.2030609@zend.com>
	 <007b01c92e37$b2952e90$3ffc1f3e@foxbox> <48F4FAF4.50509@zend.com>
	 <00e101c92e3c$d5194b90$3ffc1f3e@foxbox>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] namespaces and alpha3
From: phpwnd@gmail.com ("Josh Davis")

2008/10/14 Steph Fox <steph@php.net>:
>
> Only 8 hours ago, one Jean-Phillipe Serafin wrote: "Many people have
> starting working on top level application using namespaces, so there will a
> very bad buzz over the php community if namespaces are ripped out..." and
> there were further objections on the grounds that namespace support has been
> 'announced' on php.net.

I'd like to point out that those people started working with
namespaces *before* the idea of dropping them (or postponing them to
PHP 6) appeared on the list. I doubt those people would have done the
same if they had been told that namespaces may very well not be
available until PHP 6.

Namespace support in 5.3 received quite a lot of coverage this year
through blogs, articles and presentations, that's why some people
started implementing them or prepared to migrate their codebase. Now
if they're told it's postponed indefinitely (until PHP 6 gets a
tentative schedule) they'll feel burned and they'll think twice before
investing any time in testing new features in future releases.

I think that's what Stas meant, people would not take the risk to
implement such extensive changes without the assurance that namespace
will be available. Those who already did were pretty sure that 5.3
would have namespaces.

JD