Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81521
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: marcio3w@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <54CCF086.9090904@fischer.name>
References: <CAOsHV+tcjxRPqK697hzpWjVFxSFwy0NQZA+OWrLn6g=Q65WQCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <54CCF086.9090904@fischer.name>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 02:40:49 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOsHV+uhOu2QAgCVUJG8mrjPgLLthfvE+SyB704_qDfjrGtPPw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Markus Fischer <markus@fischer.name>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1006e6751b050e00483e
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV][RFC][DISCUSSION] Group Use Declarations
From: marcio.web2@gmail.com (Marcio Almada)

--089e013d1006e6751b050e00483e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi, Markus

> [...] with proper tooling I almost
> can't remember when I wrote the statements by hand; they usually a) get
> automatically managed b) thus alphabetically sorted and c) folded away
> in general.

You're basically stating we don't need to improve language syntax because
your
IDE already handle the laborious parts for you. I invite you to think about
a big part
of the user base that would like to have a shorthand syntax and don't like
to have
namespaces "folded away" (hidden) by an IDE.

Anyway, the "proper tooling" you reffered would quickly be updated to handle
syntax additions and you won't loose anything with that. The point is that
not
all PHP user base should be obligated to use whatever ones define as
"proper tooling"
to have a pleasant experience with the language, this should come by design
:)

Other languages like Rust, Python, Scala, etc, have analogous features and
I'm sure
IDEs have good support for it. Same will/would happen to PHP.

> The RFC says:
> "Group use statements makes it easier to identify that multiple imported:
entities are from the same module."
>
> IMHO that's too subjective. What "is hard" with the current state of
affairs?

Readability is not that subject. Current syntax is obviously harder to read:

    `use function foo\math\sin, foo\math\cos, foo\math\cosh, foo\math\tan,
foo\math\atan;`

When compared to the proposed:

    `use function foo\math\{ sin, cos, cosh, tan, atan };`

> Btw, here's a CON you can add to the RFC (and, btw., it doesn't contain
any):
> - Prevents searching sources literally for used namespaces
> What is the real benefit of using groups it and who's the group
> benefiting from that change? Maybe you can expand on that in the RFC.

That's sounds reasonable to me, I'll soon update the RFC with your point
and expand the benefits part.

Thank you!

--089e013d1006e6751b050e00483e--