# 'Sanity' tally to date - Thread: https://externals.io/message/41125 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/41125 - Started by Steph Fox on 2008-10-16T14:14:34+00:00 - Messages: 10 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #41125 — Steph Fox — 2008-10-16T14:14:34+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41125 Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and relevant opinion, express it now? We don't have long to play with this if there's to be namespace support in 5.3. At present it looks like a two-horse race between #1 full disambiguation (:::) and #3 explicit disambiguation ('use namespace'). Method of tally: anything that would be acceptable to the voter gets a point. (A weighted version is also offered here.) D/S means 'with different separator'. Name Issue A Issue B ====================================================== Greg #2 (alt #3, #1) Yes Guilherme #3 Yes Kalle #4 Yes Tony Bibbs #3 Yes Jaroslav Hanslik #1 (alt #3) Yes Nathan Rixham #4 (D/S) N/A Liz #1 or #3 Yes Andrei - 'agreed with Gregs approach' N/A Janusz Lewandowski #4 Yes Steph #3 (alt #2) Abstained Josh Davies - '#1 and #2 are functionally the same' N/A Hannes - put in a plea for classes only in 5.3 N/A Lester - WROTE SOMETHING LOUD N/A Alexey #3 Yes Marc Boeren #1 (D/S) N/A Derick #1 No Vesselin Kenashkov #3 Yes Lars #3 (alt #2) N/A Karsten Damberkalns #1 (alt #3) Yes Jochem Maas #2 (alt #3, #1) Yes Richard Quadling #1 (alt #2) No Issue A: #1 - 8 (1 with different separator) #2 - 5 #3 - 11 #4 - 3 (1 with different separator) Issue A weighted (first choice gets 2 points, rest 1): #1 - 12 + 2 = 14 #2 - 4 + 3 = 7 #3 - 12 + 5 = 17 #4 - 6 + 0 = 6 Issue B: Yes - 11 No - 2 (see Richard's rationale tho') Abs - 1 N/A - 7 --- ## #41128 — Nathan Rixham — 2008-10-16T15:15:07+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41128 · In reply to: #41125 Steph Fox wrote: > Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and relevant > opinion, express it now? We don't have long to play with this if there's to > be namespace support in 5.3. > > At present it looks like a two-horse race between #1 full disambiguation > (:::) and #3 explicit disambiguation ('use namespace'). > > Method of tally: anything that would be acceptable to the voter gets a > point. (A weighted version is also offered here.) > > D/S means 'with different separator'. > > Name Issue A Issue B > ====================================================== > Greg #2 (alt #3, #1) Yes > Guilherme #3 Yes > Kalle #4 Yes > Tony Bibbs #3 Yes > Jaroslav Hanslik #1 (alt #3) Yes > Nathan Rixham #4 (D/S) N/A > Liz #1 or #3 Yes > Andrei - 'agreed with Gregs approach' N/A > Janusz Lewandowski #4 Yes > Steph #3 (alt #2) Abstained > Josh Davies - '#1 and #2 are functionally the same' N/A > Hannes - put in a plea for classes only in 5.3 N/A > Lester - WROTE SOMETHING LOUD N/A > Alexey #3 Yes > Marc Boeren #1 (D/S) N/A > Derick #1 No > Vesselin Kenashkov #3 Yes > Lars #3 (alt #2) N/A > Karsten Damberkalns #1 (alt #3) Yes > Jochem Maas #2 (alt #3, #1) Yes > Richard Quadling #1 (alt #2) No > > Issue A: > #1 - 8 (1 with different separator) > #2 - 5 > #3 - 11 > #4 - 3 (1 with different separator) > > Issue A weighted (first choice gets 2 points, rest 1): > #1 - 12 + 2 = 14 > #2 - 4 + 3 = 7 > #3 - 12 + 5 = 17 > #4 - 6 + 0 = 6 > > Issue B: > Yes - 11 > No - 2 (see Richard's rationale tho') > Abs - 1 > N/A - 7 > you can add me down for a +1 on the solution to Issue B as well - makes logical sense --- ## #41133 — Luke Richards — 2008-10-16T15:24:39+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41133 · In reply to: #41128 In my opinion namespaces should be in 6 not 5.3 but ignoring that: +1 for Issue 1 option 1 +1 for Issue 2 2008/10/16 Nathan Rixham > Steph Fox wrote: > > > […] > you can add me down for a +1 on the solution to Issue B as well > - makes logical sense --- ## #41138 — Geoffrey Sneddon — 2008-10-16T15:46:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41138 · In reply to: #41125 > Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and > relevant > opinion, express it now? Issue A: #1. Issue B: Yes. --- ## #41140 — Janusz Lewandowski — 2008-10-16T16:49:25+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41140 · In reply to: #41125 > Janusz Lewandowski #4 Yes My alternative choice for A is #3. --- ## #41141 — Lukas Kahwe Smith — 2008-10-16T16:51:29+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41141 · In reply to: #41125 > Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and > relevant > opinion, express it now? We don't have long to play with this if > there's to > be namespace support in 5.3. > > At present it looks like a two-horse race between #1 full > disambiguation > (:::) and #3 explicit disambiguation ('use namespace'). > > Method of tally: anything that would be acceptable to the voter gets a > point. (A weighted version is also offered here.) > > D/S means 'with different separator'. i guess i should note that Steph's tally only includes votes on Greg's proposal. Stas proposal is obviously also still up for vote. In that sense "doesnt work" is maybe a bit too harshly said in the appendix of Greg's proposal, though it does obviously point out an issue. Overall no proposal comes without some caveat (or this all would be easy). regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith mls@pooteeweet.org --- ## #41142 — Steph Fox — 2008-10-16T16:58:14+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41142 · In reply to: #41141 > i guess i should note that Steph's tally only includes votes on Greg's > proposal. Stas proposal is obviously also still up for vote. Yes, we're going to have to go head-to-head at some stage very soon. Getting it down from 5 proposals to 2 would make that a bit more possible though. > In that sense "doesnt work" is maybe a bit too harshly said in the > appendix of Greg's proposal, though it does obviously point out an issue. > Overall no proposal comes without some caveat (or this all would be > easy). Is there no way to add Stas' on-list response to that accusation into the wiki? - Steph --- ## #41162 — Josh Davis — 2008-10-16T18:16:27+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41162 · In reply to: #41125 2008/10/16 Steph Fox : > Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and relevant > opinion, express it now? We don't have long to play with this if there's to > be namespace support in 5.3. Hi, As far as I'm concerned, my preference goes to: 2. use a different separator between namespace name and element [with a plea for not using :::] Yes, please change the resolution order to 1. if blah::Exception exists, use it 2. try to autoload blah::Exception 3. if internal class Exception exists, use it With that said, while I truly appreciate my opinion being taken under consideration, I also hope that decisions won't be made or pushed based on poll numbers alone (even though I don't remember any such occurence in the list's past) and that greater weight will be given to those who are already using namespaces in big, open, projects, such as the Typo3 guys. It would be bad if an anonymous crowd speculating on issues they have yet to encounter could overweight the bunch of guys who have actually been using namespaces for month. I mean, if an anonymous crowd can get a MTV award to Rick Astley, they can get anything voted as namespace operator! :) Anyway, thanks for the tally, it gives a better overview of people's opinions. JD --- ## #41265 — Marcus Boerger — 2008-10-18T20:38:23+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41265 · In reply to: #41141 Hello Lukas, --stas_s->option->because_I_could_not_read_that_code; marcus Thursday, October 16, 2008, 6:51:29 PM, you wrote: > > > […] > i guess i should note that Steph's tally only includes votes on Greg's > proposal. Stas proposal is obviously also still up for vote. In that > sense "doesnt work" is maybe a bit too harshly said in the appendix of > Greg's proposal, though it does obviously point out an issue. Overall > no proposal comes without some caveat (or this all would be easy). > regards, > Lukas Kahwe Smith > mls@pooteeweet.org Best regards, Marcus --- ## #41282 — Stanislav Malyshev — 2008-10-20T06:26:43+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/41125#41282 · In reply to: #41265 Hi! > --stas_s->option->because_I_could_not_read_that_code; Can't or won't? :) I have very hard time to believe you don't know what -> means. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com