On Dec 5, 2007 12:54 PM, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (I don't know how to make it more clear - should I > use blinking text, flash graphics and pictures of dancing girls/boys in > bikinis?) Stas, that is immature, rude, and completely uncalled for; fine, you are frustrated with our questions and arguments. Comments like this creates frustration on our part with the developers. Friction like this could easily be avoided with a little more tact and diplomacy. Now, about those pictures of those dancing girls in bikinis.... (that last part, FYI, was for brevity). > - it is *NOT* to allow you shoving all your library classes > into global space and in some magic way make same names mean different > classes by telepathically reading your mind. The purpose of namespaces > is to make working with long names - necessary to avoid collisions - > easier, by enabling not always use the whole long name but sometimes > only a part of it. > I understand this point very well Stas. If I misinterpreted how namespaces work with names that exist both in the namespace and the global space, then I sincerely apologize to you and anybody else who got offended by my misinformation. I, like you, am simply concerned with people misusing this powerful feature in a way that causes more problems for me as a developer and maintainer of PHP code. > > Globbing of this nature, in my humbled opinion, would not be the best > idea > > because of the high potential of problems. But, in the same respect, > with > > That's *exactly* why it was dropped. More precisely, it is one of the > reasons - other being it would break lookup performance and bytecode > caches. FWIW, I think that was a good decision. :) > > > I think this is a huge issue, if only for consistency with other > constructs > > of the language. There are already three different ways to write an > > Guys, really, how many times should we beat this particular dead horse? As many times as it takes. Seriously though, I see a lot of posts here that have people asking for braces. To be fair, I see equally as many posts asking to not have them, and then there are the ones that don't care either way. So really, I don't think this issue is completely dead. But, that is just my personal opinion. I concede this point as an agreement to disagree. :) > > > > The only difference, on the surface, that I see with namespaces vs. > standard > > prefixing is that namespaces has a new keyword and changes the separator > > from an underscore to the double colon. Beyond that, without the other > > Well, I think reading the actual docs would help to see more. Besides > that, namespaces allow aliasing of prefixes and automatic prefixing. > You are right. Despite my continued following of this list, I failed to realize that the PHP docs included information on namespaces. > > > For what it's worth, I would have to completely agree with Derick on > this > > issue. It just seems that namespaces could be made to do much more than > it > > already does. > > Leaving braces aside (please!), what capabilities that were not > discussed before do you need? I know you don't like to hear this Stas, but braces are pretty important -- at the very least, to me. I also believe that having multiple namespaces in a single file would be very beneficial for the many various reasons discussed on this list. Other than that, I truly feel that the addition of namespaces is a great addition to the language. Please do not construe my e-mail in a negative tone. That was not my intention at all. I do not have the attitude of "take it or leave it". I just felt compelled to offer my feelings on the matter as just another voice from userland. :) > > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ > (408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- It looked like something resembling white marble, which was probably what it was: something resembling white marble. -- Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy"
