On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 12:23 PM Levi Morrison via internals < internals@lists.php.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:57 AM Mark Randall <marand...@php.net> wrote: > > > > On 11/02/2021 16:39, Levi Morrison wrote: > > > Let me know what you think. I am hopeful this approach will work > because: > > > 1. It is focused on a specific area which already has an established > > > "namespace", but in name-only (not technically). > > > 2. It does not try to solve the larger problem, which has a lot of > > > disagreement. > > > 3. I will be proposing new types for ext/spl soon (`ReverseIterator` > > > and an array iterator that is more efficient than `\ArrayIterator`), > > > and Tyson Andre has already proposed `CachedIterable` and company > > > which is in `ext/spl`, so this space has active development. > > > > > > Thank you for your time. > > > > > > > Do you want a dumping ground? Because this is how you create a dumping > > ground :-) > > > > If we're going to start putting things into namespaces (and we should) > > then we should absolutely avoid repeating the mistakes of the past by > > dumping completely unrelated things together. > > I agree, which is the point of accepting things in a narrow scope. > Data structures and iterators go hand-in-hand, as many iterator > implementations are directly connected to the internal implementation > details of the related data structure. There are other iterators, and > as long as they are general purpose they are fine too. These things > are related, not unrelated. > > > If SPL\ is to exist (and personally I think SPL is so cancerous, it > > shouldn't) then IMO it must absolutely be SPL\iterators. > > As mentioned in the previous point, iterators and data structures > belong together. It does not make sense to separate the implementation > of FixedArray and its iterator into two different namespaces; they are > one cohesive unit. > > Lastly, if we don't adopt a namespace soon, what will new names be? I > can guarantee it will be something like `SplReverseIterator`, not > `SplIteratorReverseIterator`. It won't be > `SplDatastructureCachedIterable`, it would be something like > `SplCachedIterable` (or `CachedIterable`, ugh). > > As you see, "Spl" _is_ the namespace. Any more or any less is > incongruent with what we have. This is why I am hopeful that > _specifically_ using "Spl" for these specific types can reach > agreement; all we are changing is `Spl$thing` to `Spl\$thing`. > > I think Spl makes sense (there might be a debate over whether it should be Spl or SPL though). How feasible is it to create generate a deprecation notice when the global version is used? I assume the hope is to eventually move away from using those, and I don't think that's a horrible BC break given that users have enough time to prepare for it. > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Chase Peeler chasepee...@gmail.com
