Marcus,
I have good news on this (I added both constants and function support!).
I will post the patch soon. There are still a few things that need to
be discussed, but right now the functionality is a huge step forward.
Best regards,
Jessie
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Helgi,
obviously one problem is that PEAR does ignore coding standards. Classes
should be prefixed in both pear and core. And neither Date nor File is in
any way prefixed. In th end all we see here is that we want namespaces asap.
One thing to discuss now is whether we want to put out 5.1.1 or even
5.1.0pl1 asap with Date in ext/Date renamed to something diferent.
best regards
marcus
Friday, November 25, 2005, 8:40:47 AM, you wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:16:43 +0800, Alan Knowles wrote:
This one's a bit more annoying than usual ;)
It will basically break application that depends on the Date package
(eg. most of my code as DataObjects uses it internally).. Do we really
need another barrier to upgrade to 5.*?
Yeah indeed, now I'll have a heap of a time when my customers want to
upgrade to PHP 5.1, I find it a bit odd to have this kind of breakage ...
didn't we have similar situation with PEAR::File and the SPL::File ? Which
was later renamed to FileObject so both could happily live side by side ?
(or is my memory failing me)
IMHO this should be rolled back in .1 and only introduced in PHP 6 (on by
default)
Rasmus mentioned that no PEAR person tested the final RC and all that and
thus this issue wasn't found ... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that
change done between the final RC and the official release ?
Regards
Helgi
Best regards,
Marcus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
