Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94988
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.169 as permitted sender)
To: internals@lists.php.net, Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk>,
 Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
References: <CADqTB_gBFM_2yNDQemPs68Fab4Hbd8pGj38a3-HSQ+CRcnDyvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c9td1bt2zCbGfXdbGtFO-4qhJuJnkAEdsQDaH+wATDOmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NpFBCJW1x3Yxz3FDx+6JGcdaGXZuBseEOaxXG0fnFHV0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <de01a2d6-f03a-834d-b211-213a6f4cca1e@gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NppJ2+rO7Y9=kqSrYhwHGDQ_faSSPGmaSY6sZPRrOKCtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <33781781-2a63-78c1-68a1-9e19ad720d8d@gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NrHmn71UzqMNPTJe18M-9OjgsG2YDsdhhNJ-vfrsYu5yw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1d89ec68-de5e-2670-aed1-f12872c073c3@gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_gZJgtV2rVhzMd_ExpfXxW-w0wR8GVfNXJc6wFO6DOQmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <aaa65a04-d349-62ae-fd47-3901a6afeefe@gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_hdq+kyM_cJ_e7ent3OK1ZPOco+YZe0TB-yugPLx1argw@mail.gmail.com>
 <615f02b9-0621-2e7a-bec9-af4e342529b2@gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_jdv36JBTuh6YL4J0_VJ_kDosmVLnj8FdCjzLHGn1W12w@mail.gmail.com>
 <80776a32-5eda-271f-4270-2843b453a545@fleshgrinder.com>
Message-ID: <8ac85eb6-0ecd-7b11-076a-da6cb9fe3184@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:58:41 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <80776a32-5eda-271f-4270-2843b453a545@fleshgrinder.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Function auto-loading
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

> Having the use statement trigger the auto-loader would result in a lot
> of broken code because of optional dependencies (remember the examples I
> showed you in the annotation thread).

I think it's not a good idea in general. use statement right now is
basically a syntax sugar - you just change interpretation of names. But
you don't cause anything to load by this statement. Changing it would
mean people have to change a lot of assumptions about what is loaded
when. E.g., there's a lot of code which use's classes and spaces that
may not even exist - just because they *might* exist in some scenarios,
and will be used in those scenarios, further down in the code.

I don't think completely changing the semantics of a very widely used
statement is anything we should be doing.

> This would make it even more painful for users to define anything in the
> global namespace; a good thing.

No it's not. Why should it be a good thing?

> It would however encourage people to prefix their stuff inline with a
> backslash, otherwise you end up with an endless use chain for every

I'm sorry but this is horrible. PHP code should not look like a fence of
backslashes, backslashes do not have any useful function there and in
99.9999% of cases global functions *are* global functions, and nobody is
overriding them. Yes, you can override strlen. No, nobody (within
0.00001% accuracy) does.

> built-in feature which is not nice. That being said, it's required
> anyways if we are really going to introduce namespaces for everything
> within PHP (e.g. `use function php\random_bytes;`). Something I still
> think is a bad idea at least for procedural first-level functions.

It's a bad idea for all existing functions and classes. Because it adds
complications for people without giving them anything in exchange.
-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com