On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:35 AM Benas IML <benas.molis....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello, > > I honestly don't care what it's called, but I am seeing some arguments being used in favor of changing it that I think are invalid. > Since your project is just a single example, we still can't make such a > bold > claim that `\Attribute` is used a lot. > > As with any possible BC break, the issue isn't what we know, but what we don't know. It's the potential impact to closed source or other proprietary projects out there, weighed against the benefit. Since "Attribute" is a pretty common term in programming, the odds of some of those projects having an Attribute class in the global namespace is higher than some esoteric term rarely used in a programming context. > While "attribute" is a fairly generic word, just about everyone uses > namespaced > classes and therefore it's not a huge problem. Moreover, PHP 8 is a major > release so BC in such cases isn't the first priority. > > Again, your assumption that just about everyone uses namespaced classes doesn't take into account closed source projects. I don't care if it's a major release or not - BC breaks should always be avoided without a major benefit > Also, it's important to mention that the introduction of functions such as > `str_contains()` is also a breaking change for some. But the benefits it > provides outweigh the 0.1% who may get BC issues. > > str_contains adds functionality to PHP. We aren't debating whether to add attribute functionality to PHP, but what to call it. As such, this argument is an invalid comparison. > Best regards, > Benas Seliuginas > I don't think PhpAttribute is a bad name. Per the RFC: "Attributes as a form of structured, syntactic metadata to declarations of classes, properties, functions, methods, parameters and constants. Attributes allow to define configuration directives directly embedded with the declaration of that code." - In other words, they are Attributes of PHP constructs. While that additional Php might not be necessary to avoid ambiguation in the same way it was for Token, I don't think it's an improper disambiguation either. As Derick said below "PHP owns the top-level namespace but tries to find decent descriptive names and avoid any obvious clashes." - These seems like a prime example of using "descriptive names" to "avoid any obvious clashes" As I said above, I'm ambivalent about this particular issue. However, I get nervous when I start to see the "Who cares if it breaks stuff" or "Well, they shouldn't be doing it that way, so screw them" arguments pop up. While the chances of a BC break might be minimal using "Attribute" - I don't think that PhpAttribute is an undue burden in an attempt to avoid such instances, nor is it logically inconsistent with other Php* named classes. -- Chase Peeler chasepee...@gmail.com
