On 2011-08-17, Michael Morris <dmgx.mich...@gmail.com> wrote:
> --001636833a84f3029304aab9fd15
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> This member of the peanut gallery would like to point out the following
> danger. Consider the following function collection for namespace A.
>
> namespace A;
> function strpos() {}
> function myfunc() {}
>
> Now if I understand the RFC correctly there's an unintuitive problem as
> follows - if myfunc is called first, strpos gets redefined for that
> namespace and functions as the author might expect for the namespace. If
> strpos gets called first then it will behave as it does in the global
> namespace, which may or may not be desirable. In any event, from where I
> stand here in userland, this is potentially confusing. I'm an amateur of
> the 1st degree, but my gut tells me that the behavior state of any given
> function should NOT be determined by whether or not a different function was
> invoked before it.
There's nothing saying you can't have the exact same situation right now
with classes and autoloading, too.
Example:
namespace A;
class ReflectionClass
{ /* ... */ }
class MyClass
{ /* ... */ }
What if you have an autoloader that, on encountering A\MyClass then
loads that file? You've now redefined ReflectionClass for the A
namespace.
The main difference, of course, is that if ReflectionClass is not
explicitly imported, PHP will barf and tell you it doesn't know about
A\ReflectionClass.
While I understand your objections, I think that after the functionality
exists, there can be discussions about best practices -- e.g., putting
one function per file when autoloading, or documenting when all
functions for a given namespace will be in a single file. It's really a
matter of the project educating its users -- I don't think it should be
a blocker for implementing it at the language level, though.
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Chris Stockton
><chrisstockto...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hello Stas,
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@sugarcrm.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> > It's not a shortcoming, it was designed that way, and for very serious
>> > reasons. If you want to know the reasons, there were discussed
>> extensively
>> > when namespaces were discussed. Please re-read that discussion. And all
>> > things you propose now were already discussed back then too. If you hope
>> > people would write \strlen instead of strlen, this discussion is
>> pointless
>> > because it won't happen.
>> > --
>>
>> I see your viewpoint from a architectural/design perspective and they
>> are valid, but I think the impact and design could be lightened with
>> some simple rules of precedence.
>>
>> I think it would be fair to say, autoloader will not be called on a
>> function like strpos, or any builtin compiled extension. Only once
>> those are cycled through will autoloader for functions be called. At
>> this point the performance penalty doesn't exist, because at this
>> point the program execution would have halted with a fatal error
>> anyways.
>>
>> -Chris
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>
> --001636833a84f3029304aab9fd15--
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead | matt...@zend.com
Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
