On 02.10.2024 at 12:55, Gina P. Banyard wrote: > On Wednesday, 2 October 2024 at 00:32, Larry Garfield > <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > >> I have no strong opinions on this RFC as I've not paid close attention to >> it, but "we can't introduce an unnamespaced class, that's a BC break" is >> simply not true, and not consistent with how Internals and the stdlib are >> and have been developed. > > This is not a new class, it is a class that has existed since the PHP 4 days.
Plus it is not part of some rarely used extension, but rather of ext/standard, so it is always available, and nobody had been able to declare a userland class Directory (https://3v4l.org/dUOq0). > Arguably, if this would be a new class, that argument would have more merit. Right. > But changing the name of class that is 20+ years old and could have been used > in type declarations since possibly PHP 5.0 is a non-starter IMHO. I agree, although one could pursue the RFC process. This would be a completely different RFC, though. Christoph
