Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:98178
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain paragonie.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f5efaa96-29f5-88e9-e08f-bb605e1b3b56@fleshgrinder.com>
References: <CAKws9z3+qrGner3K58rPqPdXW00YFCm4esrr5xhr6ettoRRVYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGa2bXYw1Bofui58tr8gfyWu0YPdzoFokXZUZKSnnYbpCj11uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKws9z1SAkYj+zMOYhAcJD7t4FPrRz5Qv+9LE5Jr1zYUA68g3Q@mail.gmail.com> <f5efaa96-29f5-88e9-e08f-bb605e1b3b56@fleshgrinder.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 10:20:45 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKws9z0zYZyPG55nhB54ju_2ut8XwF0xuxv15+aiWzDks89__w@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Libsodium as a core extension in PHP 7.2
From: scott@paragonie.com (Scott Arciszewski)

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Fleshgrinder <php@fleshgrinder.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/4/2017 12:54 AM, Scott Arciszewski wrote:
> > I like \Sodium\foo instead of sodium_foo, but it deviates from the norm.
> > If we're going to break the norm, we should do so on a stronger majority
> > than 50%+1.
> >
>
> I see another problem besides the issue that a namespaced core elements
> are being introduced like in the US Senate, hidden within another bill,
> and the fact that I still don't like the Sodium API itself and that is
> that this might make autoloader updates in the future in regards to
> functions and/or constants more complicated.
>
> One idea back than was that the autoloader is only triggered for things
> that are listed in a use statement. This would have multiple advantages
> since we would not require any backslash in front of built-in stuff
> anymore as anything that is not within a use would never trigger the
> autoloader and remove any potential performance hit for built-in stuff
> due to autoloading.
>
> Sodium having its own namespace would definitely appear in use
> statements because that is how IDEs work today and because nobody wants
> to write `Sodium\foo()`, or do they?
>
> --
> Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger

Hi,

> I see another problem besides the issue that a namespaced core elements
> are being introduced like in the US Senate, hidden within another bill,

This is a separate choice that people can vote for. It's not exactly
hidden; nor is it bundled into a single "Yes/No".

The vote option concerns "permit an exception to the coding style" not
"change the coding style for everything". If anyone playing at home
wants to propose a separate RFC to update the coding style to allow
the use of namespaced functions in all future RFCs, it looks like (at
present count) at least 7 people would find such a proposal amicable.
(8 if you count me, though I don't have vote karma so my opinion is
irrelevant.)

Regards,

Scott Arciszewski
Chief Development Officer
Paragon Initiative Enterprises <https://paragonie.com>