On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: > > On 13 Oct 2014, at 15:14, Marco Pivetta <ocram...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 13 October 2014 16:12, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: > > 2. Shouldn’t it return fully-qualified class names beginning with a > backslash? > > > > When in string context, we are typically always talking about FQCNs, so > the leading backslash is not needed and should be omitted. > > I disagree. It shouldn’t be implicitly fully-qualified. If there’s no > leading backslash, then you have to add one to actually use it. If it’s a > FQCN it should have a \. If and only if it is not a FQCN, it should lack a > \. >
There is nothing here to disagree over, it's not a matter of opinion. Canonical class names in PHP do not use a leading backslash. If you do Foo::class you will get back "Foo" and not "\Foo" or any such nonsense. A leading backslash is only used for literal class name references in the source code. String class names should not be used with a leading backslash (even though we usually tolerate it). Nikita
