On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@sugarcrm.com> wrote: > Hi! > >> I wasn't assuming. I was outright making a factual statement. I never >> made any implications of the intellectual levels of those implementing >> the spec. I understand the RFC full well and know why the design is >> the way it is. I was answering the ops question. Please read what I >> said before you make your own assumptions. > > Sorry, statements like "haphazard way", "never well designed", "it's a > mess", "they don't really resemble namespaces", "just some fancy magic", > etc. have nothing to do with facts. Actually, facts are exactly the > opposite - they were designed, were extensively discussed with > soliciting feedback from many stakeholders, and were implemented exactly > as planned. You may not like the way there were implemented, that's your > opinion (not a fact) and you are entitled to it. But you didn't limit > yourself to saying "I don't like them". You specifically said that they > were never well designed and haphazardly implemented. This is factually > false.
Fair enough. I'll be more careful to separate my opinions from my objective answers next time :) > > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
