Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:68871
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.50 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5224EEEF.3070204@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CAAyV7nFRfuu0dGnu0FV1ehkqwQR6=dUFSHMP=6CJsAVWghCADg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5220437A.7050008@sugarcrm.com>
	<CALtuQzAjChxqOWNzkcd09c_UsoNe6XtCfTM6ADDoQMgZt-A_UA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5220D212.3010101@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAF+90c-D7OxSW+ei8xtHYKnRg048_KuBCtDHkh4bDqVNZ+YAcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<61FCD6C4A31248078FEAD2BA73D7CD44@gmail.com>
	<CALtuQzCeiYfb_cnRTv2OUZ3yqQuHGoMzrtxyXGxhUtRxRKzSQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<7AF31CC1D1554454AC95AE758D23E92E@gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH5ZsOjGy9yXHp9Lx5uxu4Wn6v_xc=jRLKAhMqZQaSQOqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D5F6120CA7CA4FB48CD6F10835D947F9@gmail.com>
	<CAA9esyQBHoEj7Nn+8bRZFkMG3638TdLZfy5CaSUGKyK0L-jjow@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nFCks3YwCLt6iwhcwWfV5JWuRvykdCL5qC7FLpqnY5Z9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOWwgpnm1KepENJ_+7hbwCvYzYbhgQ=xcLG7rxpLtuR8o-E52A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nH53sBKepCU0xwRuO=XwiaCqO_ZH+dkajDvb4ar2-WhPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<52243F6C.7070806@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAAyV7nHSsZ6s5MUFzcXR_K45XHDK34GPxwo5yv9koHdi0+LeoQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5224EEEF.3070204@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 17:57:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAyV7nFSB0V9jeQKR66PcTP+v3H5Np5Ctw_qAUgv2k0kmX=nWg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5db26a2bd4f404e56da7bc
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Function autoloading
From: ircmaxell@gmail.com (Anthony Ferrara)

--047d7b5db26a2bd4f404e56da7bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Stas,


On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > So the only case this effects is that you can't autoload a function from
> > the same namespace that you're currently in without explicitly using
> > that function.
> >
> > That's not such a huge issue.
>
> I think it is such a huge issue, because this means this functionality
> can not be used for reliably loading namespaced functions without prior
> declaration, and this is pretty much the use case we've been preached
> about all along. So if it doesn't work in this case without prior
> declarations just for it, than how it's better than require?


It doesn't *need* prior declaration. It needs either prior declaration or
qualification (absolute or relative). But more on that in a sec.


> > But "fixing" that would be such a massive BC break...
>
> There's nothing to "fix", it was a conscious decision about how
> namespaces must work. Alternative is doing \strlen each time you need
> string length, which would be just silly.


So what your saying, if I understand you correctly, is that PHP was
intentionally designed to be non-deterministic? And it was designed that
way to save a single character?

To get why I think that's such a big deal, let's look at some sample code:

namespace Foo {
    function test1($input) {
        return strlen($input);
    }
    function test2($input) {
        return strlen($input);
    }
    var_dump(test1("test")); // int(4)

    // Simulate require
    eval('namespace Foo { function strlen($input) { return 42; }}');

    var_dump(test2("test")); // int(42)
    var_dump(test1("test")); // int(4) on 5.4+, int(42) on 5.3
}

The eval is just there to simulate a require_once. Thanks to function
caching, NOTHING makes sense!!! http://3v4l.org/MMvFv

If you don't agree that behavior is wonky, then I'm not sure where else to
go.


> > You would only need to explicitly `use function` those in your current
> > namespace. Any outside (relative or absolute calls) would still work
> fine.
>
> It's not "only" - functions in current namespace are exactly those I'm
> likely to use.


Look at the code where you use classes. How many times to do use a class
from your current namespace vs another one. The code I've looked at tends
to favor other namespaces significantly...


> > And after all, this is the exact reason we implemented `use function`.
> > Because namespaces WERE useless for functions until last week. Now we
> > have the power to be explicit with our calls.
>
> I don't think RFC proposed well before this issue was raised was
> actually meant only to fix broken function autoloading proposal. I
> sincerely hope it has more uses than that, otherwise it's a pretty big
> mistake.
> > That's how functions (and namespaces) have always worked. Give it a
> > try: http://3v4l.org/S6FN8 Keep in mind, functions have been treated as
>
> No it's not how it worked - function resolution rules were always "try
> namespace, then global", unless alias is explicitly specified by use
> (aliased name is treated as fully qualified, because this is what the
> function of aliasing is). Just try to remove "use" statement and see.


It's only "try namespace, then global" in the case where there's no `\` in
the function name. Compile code that does the check:
http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_TRUNK/Zend/zend_compile.c#1938


> > The big difference is that last time there was no mechanism to be
> > explicit with what you wanted your code to do without fully qualifying
> > every call. Today we have `use function`.
>
> Which is the same specification, just at the beginning of the file. I'd
> rather do one require then ten use functions. My opinion is producing
> autoloader that is inconsistent with how language itself treats import
> would only produce more WTFs and more people thinking nothing in PHP
> makes sense and nobody cares about internal consistency of the language.
>

Anthony

PS: I think it's ironic talking about internal consistency of a language in
the same reply where you justify "try namespace, then global" as a good
design feature. Just pointing that out...

--047d7b5db26a2bd4f404e56da7bc--