On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Ryan Panning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, I second this completely
>
> From someone who *was* using namespaces developing against the 5.3 branch,
> this is going to happen sooner or later. I found that :: just causes to many
> questions when used in namespaces. Using :: or -> just for the sake of
> reusing existing tokens is just wrong. I'm in favor of # if it can be worked
> out.
+1 as well, but I must say # is not right, it is a very black/filled
character, as in it doesn't visually#separate#words#that#well. Using
the dot would be really nice, but I guess it would break with
something like this : "concat".foo.bar()."baz" so it's not an option.
Using a single colon might work out ? foo:bar:class::staticFunc()
sounds good to me, but maybe I missed something.
I also had the idea of using the underscore, even though I guess we
can't go through with this as people _might_ have used double
underscores in their class names, I guess it would work out quite well
with single underscores, for example :
class Foo_Bar {
public static function callMe()
}
Foo_Bar::callMe();
..would be read as class Bar in namespace Foo, but it would be
transparent to everyone since if you use something with a fully
qualified name you don't need to "use" them, right ?
Anyway it's just a couple ideas, but please stop holding on to that
double colon.
--
Jordi
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
