Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:99486
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <0f4a44c1-67b4-b107-c0b6-f2ae7554167a@fleshgrinder.com>
References: <990f6d85-e3ed-05a4-42e0-d3a279c0ebe7@fleshgrinder.com>
 <277f53cd-0e79-6fcc-fa4b-b0527ca525b6@fleshgrinder.com> <CAFMT4Nr1Git3u6oEBpZe4W3e68MnrOr6_bwAsRTzDtS2Y=Hbmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3515b508-4571-0d57-6b47-616cae0b0908@fleshgrinder.com> <CAFMT4NqaoC5==tRsy_r1f7tqnAf_sTTrHyrUZqMt2cW11M1HdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <0f4a44c1-67b4-b107-c0b6-f2ae7554167a@fleshgrinder.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 15:11:46 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFMT4Nr8mg-Ufn0pHW42rPyqNohru+kCDWNV1EYR=Z8qQehMWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fleshgrinder <php@fleshgrinder.com>
Cc: php-internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Namespaces in Core
From: levim@php.net (Levi Morrison)

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Fleshgrinder <php@fleshgrinder.com> wrote:
> On 6/10/2017 9:24 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> If we were starting from scratch maybe we'd do as you are proposing.
>> However, there is absolutely zero value in these specific things being
>> namespaced *anywhere*:
>>
>>   - Arrays
>>   - Reflection
>>   - Strings
>>   - IO
>>
>> We already have established conventions and prefixes around these.
>> Moving them to a namespace has zero value.
>>
>> I'm not sure what logging you are talking about for PHP.
>>
>> That leaves UUID, which I am fine with having its own namespace if
>> there are enough functions, constants, classes, etc to support it.
>>
>
> These are examples!?!
>
> I see no reason to limit our thoughts and imagination here. This is a
> proposal for the future of PHP, for whatever might come. Limiting us
> seems more than counterproductive to me.
>
> Array, Bool, Int, Float, String, ... all of them are valid things to
> think about. Not only as an intellectual game, but also in the light of
> _scalar objects_ [1].
>
> [1] https://github.com/nikic/scalar_objects
>
> PS: Moving of anything that already exists was never mentioned, implied,
> or part of the proposal. This is something Levi just brought up and I
> want to repudiate myself in the strongest terms from moving anything!
>
> --
> Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger
>

You put out namespaces for them which implies you think we might do that.