Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54694 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 16894 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2011 17:19:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Aug 2011 17:19:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.123 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.123 smtp123.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.123] ([67.192.241.123:47294] helo=smtp123.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 8E/F5-21097-4994D4E4 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:19:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp22.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id A37FB17060B; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:19:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp22.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 53B4F170565; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:19:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E4D498F.9040408@sugarcrm.com> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:19:11 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sebastian Krebs CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: <4E4C3D7D.3040606@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E4C3D7D.3040606@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Function autoloading through spl_autoload* From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! On 8/17/11 3:15 PM, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > However, in my opinion the important part is to just make a decision the > sooner, the better, as long as there are not too much creepy code out > there (I don't know any and I can't imagine, that there is). Because > functions with namespace are quite unhandy without autoloading and I > don't think, that there is much use of it. We already made the decision, when we introduced the namespaces and made the resolution order what it is now. And we considered all the variants and discussed all the arguments brought here back then. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227