Hi, It seems we would never reach some consensus, so I prefer to stick to the voting process. Looks like it's another battle between core developers and framework core developers, where the first ones don't see a benefit at all and have to opt for a side while the other side is eagerly requesting the feature.
Point #4 would probably turn ClassLoader useless, mainly because shared hosting users would never have the ability to install a PECL extension their own. That way, frameworks would still require to bundle their own ClassLoader, turning the proposal of all this effort useless. The idea is to have something native, not pluggable by a few. Cheers, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, with respect to that, are there any examples of where PHP > currently "reserves the namespace"? I can declare functions/classes > for every single disablable/PECL extension right now. So is there > even a method to "reserve a namespace", yet alone enforce that in > core? > > And with respect to the re-compile, what usually happens is that the > windows builds ship with DLLs of the compiled extensions. So it's not > a "part of the core compile", but an extension that can be enabled via > php.ini (as is currently working with apc, mbstring, mysql, mysqli, > etc). > > Anthony > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: >> Anthony Ferrara wrote: >>> >>> Lester, >>> >>> I think he was referring to something like the MySQL/bcmath/etc >>> extension where it ships in core, but is disabled by default (requires >>> a compile-time option). >>> >>> I think what you interpreted it as is basically just what PECL is for >>> and how it works? Considering that it would basically be just `pecl >>> install PSRClassLoader`? And at that point there's no reason for >>> anything in the core (even reserving a namespace). That's how other >>> extensions (even popular ones like apc) work now... >>> >>> Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean...? >> >> Actually the "reserve the namespace" is probably the important piece of the >> jigsaw? >> Also while Linux 'installs' can easily 'recompile', windows builds are >> necessarily pre-compiled, so what is compiled in and what is available via >> an extension becomes more important. >> >>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Lester Caine<les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sebastian Bergmann wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1- The same as you wrote. Having it in SPL and in PHP 5.4 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2- Have it in PHP 5.4 as an external extension (FIG, PSR or PSG), >>>>>>> enabled by default. >>>>>>> 3- As an external extension, disabled by default. This would require >>>>>>> PHP core to reserve the namespace for us. >>>>> >>>>> You are missing 4: not have it at all (which would get my +1). >>>> >>>> 3 would be acceptable if external extensions were downloaded separately >>>> to >>>> the core distribution ... but I suppose that IS 4 ;) >>>> Isn't it about time we considered a better distribution model for >>>> additions >>>> like this? >> >> >> -- >> Lester Caine - G8HFL >> ----------------------------- >> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact >> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk >> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ >> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// >> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php >> >> -- >> 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 > > -- Guilherme Blanco Mobile: +55 (11) 8118-4422 MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com São Paulo - SP/Brazil -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
