[RFC] Specify namespace to include file into.

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:05:19 +0100, Michael Morris
dmgx.michael@gmail.com wrote:

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/changes_to_include_and_require

Since the reaction to the first of the two suggestions was largely
negative I've withdrawn it for now to focus on the second of the two
changes. In all honestly, these two suggestions should have had
independent RFC's from the start.

Of the two suggestions this one has the more profound implications to
the language even if it is simpler to implement. Thoughts?

How exactly would this be useful?

The purpose of namespaces is to avoid collision of symbols. Are you
saying they did not solve this problem and you have to rename already
namespaced files?

I also don't understand your template argument. Why would you need to
namespace templates? Typically they are included from inside a function
(and therefore don't change/access the global namespace).

I only see some usefulness as a transitional measure, which would save
from namespacing 'legacy' libraries. But PHP 5.5 seems a bit late to
introduce such measure.

--
Gustavo Lopes

Michael,

Quick question: how would this work with require_once?

Let's say that I have a class Foo defined in a file without a
namespace declaration.

What happens if I require_once with a namespace first (so Foo gets
imported into the namespace), and then require_once later without a
namespace? Should it require twice? Which then could break things
(if there was procedural or initialization code in there)... If not,
then you won't have Foo in the root namespace, and lead to other
errors.

Anthony

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/changes_to_include_and_require

Since the reaction to the first of the two suggestions was largely
negative I've withdrawn it for now to focus on the second of the two
changes.  In all honestly, these two suggestions should have had
independent RFC's from the start.

Of the two suggestions this one has the more profound implications to
the language even if it is simpler to implement.  Thoughts?

At first glance, this is technically impossible, with regards to our
current resolution rules:
http://php.net/manual/en/language.namespaces.rules.php

Assuming you have an un-namespaced:

class Db {
public function __construct() {
$this->conn = new PDO(..);
}
}

and you require this as:

require ./path/to/Db.php, 'Some\SubDb';

How does PDO get resolved? Automatically as \PDO or as \Some\SubDb\PDO?

Isn't it just easier to change the code? ;)

-ralph

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/changes_to_include_and_require

Since the reaction to the first of the two suggestions was largely
negative I've withdrawn it for now to focus on the second of the two
changes. In all honestly, these two suggestions should have had
independent RFC's from the start.

Of the two suggestions this one has the more profound implications to
the language even if it is simpler to implement. Thoughts?

Am 08.03.2012 17:05, schrieb Michael Morris:

Thoughts?

Sounds pointless/useless to me.

--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/