Sounds fantastic to me.
Not a fan of the {} namespaces but each to their own.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On the ZendCon, we (Marcus, Elizabeth, Andi and myself) had a talk about
> what we'd like to do with namespaces, and we arrived at the following
> conclusions, which we propose to implement in 5.3:
>
> 1. Allow braces for namespaces. So, the syntax for namespaces will be:
> a) namespace foo;
> should be first (non-comment) statement in the file, namespace extends to
> the end of the file or next namespace declaration.
> b) namespace foo {}
> can appear anywhere on the top scope (can not be nested).
> Mixing both syntaxes in one file is not possible. The semantics of both
> syntaxes will be identical.
>
> 2. Simplify resolution order for classes in the namespace: unqualified names
> are resolved this way:
> a) check "use" list if the name was defined at "use", follow that resolution
> b) if not, the name resolves to namespace::name
> Consequence of this will be that for using internal class inside namespace
> one would need to refer to it either as ::Foo or do use ::Foo prior to its
> usage.
>
> 3. Functions will not be allowed inside namespaces. We arrived to conclusion
> that they are much more trouble than they're worth, and summarily we would
> be better off without them. Most of the functionality could be easily
> achieved using static class methods, and the rest may be emulated with
> variable function names, etc.
>
> Comments?
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/
> (408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
