On 13/08/2019 21:26, Rowan Collins wrote:
Ah, that makes sense. Does that necessarily mean we need a dummy class,
though? The autoloading logic in the engine knows that it called the
autoload callback expecting a package definition, so can count as
success that the package is now defined.
In other words, the file the autoloader included would look like this
(again, sticking to the notion that "package" is separate from
"namespace"):
Personally with file-level opt ins I'm not 100% sold on the benefits of
packages over namespace level information. I guess I'm not certain on
what problem they're trying to solve that's different from just another
object at namespace level.
As for the dummy class, the only real benefit is that existing
autoloading procedures can be used to locate it and be included with
minimal overhead.
PHP can call the autoloader internally but it would require userland
loaders to be upgraded with it, not exactly a huge stretch, especially
with most things being composer-based, but a dummy class would make it
work out the box, including optimization steps like dumping the class list.
Mark Randall
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
