Stanislav Malyshev 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.
I'm happy with
#1 although I prefer 1 syntax to rule them all, I can live with this
#2
#3 if it also includes removing namespace constants
For future post-5.3, functions could be added back in. The ambiguity
issue could easily be fixed by having a different scoping resolution
operator for namespaced classes vs. namespaced functions/consts. For
instance:
<?php
blah::thing::mymethod(); // namespaced class blah::thing, method call to
mymethod
echo blah::thing::constant; // namespaced class blah::thing, class
constant constant
blah::thing:>func(); // namespaced function blah::thing:>func
echo blah::thing:>constant; // namespaced constant blah::thing:>constant
blah::thing:>$var = 1; // namespaced variable blah::thing:>$var (pure
fantasy, but illustrates the point)
blah::thing::$var = 1; // namespaced class blah::thing, class variable $var
?>
Before anyone gets all hyper, my point is *not* to introduce :>, but to
explain that it is in fact technically feasible to extend the definition
of namespaces later to add support for non-class elements and it would
work just fine.
It is, however, not going to be possible to do this post-5.3 without the
change above.
Note that we have a different operator for dereferencing static class
members (::) versus object members (->) for the reason that the thing
being dereferenced is different. Namespaces are in fact different from
classes, so the problem with the current implementation is that the same
operator (::) used for both means we cannot allow any ambiguity between
namespace contents and class contents.
As long as classes cannot contain other classes:
<?php
class one {
class dearGodNO {}
}
?>
then :: can be used for both namespace operator and static class
operator if functions/constants are removed from namespaces.
Greg
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
