On 04.11.2008, at 17:15, Gregory Beaver wrote:
In other words, it is perfectly all right to have a different name
resolution for classes than we have for functions and constants
because
of this different expectation. It is dangerous to fallback for
classes
prior to autoload, but it is not at all dangerous for
functions/constants because the expectation is different.
To me the key question is do we want to let people overload global
classes easily or are we mostly talking about convinience? Class names
are typed quite seldom (and even in a few years down the road the bulk
of PHP's features will be provided via functions), so I would not
think that we really need to focus on convenience here.
For this reason, the only resolution that we should be considering is:
classes:
1) try ns::class
2) autoload ns::class
3) fail
functions/constants:
1) try ns::function/ns::const
2) try internal function/const
3) fail.
Note that I say "try internal" because the only purpose behind
allowing
this is to make it easier to use PHP's built-in functionality. Any
userspace stuff should be specifically \prefixed or imported via use.
I dont think it makes sense to differentiate between internal and non
internal functions. I think this is quite hard to grasp, I also do not
see the real benefit.
And (yes) we need import for functions.
Would be nice to have .. for me the pains for functions/constants have
reached the threshold now that I am reviewing the question of
resolution.
regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
