Sounds fantastic to me.
Not a fan of the {} namespaces but each to their own.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On the ZendCon, we (Marcus, Elizabeth, Andi and myself) had a talk about
> what we'd like to do with namespaces, and we arrived at
Hello Michael,
I think it is pretty useful.
marcus
Monday, September 22, 2008, 8:17:58 PM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> I wonder what the general opinion is on adding pecl/http to the main PHP
> distribution? Many people have poked me in the past, so I guessed it's
> time to ask me and you that quest
Hello Hannes,
Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 3:04:16 PM, you wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 14:54, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That being said, there is some overlap in features with existing
>> functionality. Maybe if we schedule this for PHP 6, then we might want to
>> mark
Steph Fox wrote:
Lets just let it die. It is un-needed, un-wanted by many, and the end
result seems to be less that optimal, or even a true implementation
of namespaces.
Oddly enough, I agree with Kevin with my heart and soul. But then I hear
the howls of outrage from the Other Side, who campa
Steph...
I think you should not tell me this... =) I already know it and heard
(like you) 5,451,741,709,125 times.
Cya,
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> For those that do not understand very well the explanation of jvlad...
>
> Guileherme, you are missing
For those that do not understand very well the explanation of jvlad...
Guileherme, you are missing the point. We'd all like to see PHP 5.3.0 out
there. It has a lot to offer, but namespace support is very obviously
problematic. That's it, that's all.
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
For those that do not understand very well the explanation of jvlad...
He's suggesting to change the class struct to be an scope struct, and
have a property that tells if it's a namespace or a class, and reuse
the implementation of class which already works very well.
The nested support is achieve
Lets just let it die. It is un-needed, un-wanted by many, and the end
result seems to be less that optimal, or even a true implementation
of namespaces.
Oddly enough, I agree with Kevin with my heart and soul. But then I hear the
howls of outrage from the Other Side, who campaigned without ruth
Hi!
To clarify, with syntax B you can do multiple namespaces in one file? I have
no objection then.
Yes.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To u
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: nothing of technical importance in this email, but it might
make you feel better :-) ... even Stas!]]
Kevin Waterson schreef:
This one time, at band camp, "jvlad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
everything that jvlad wrote was way too vague for me to understand
so I couldn't pos
I disagree here...it is both wanted and and needed. This feature has been
promised to the community for quite some time now and I'd simply remind you you
do have the option of *not* using namespaces if you don't want too. If you
like REALLY_LONG_CLASS_NAMES that's still perfectly valid. Don't
This one time, at band camp, "jvlad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> May I suggest something in this area?
May I suggest something also.. Lets just let namespaces die and let
it become a repressed memory as it seems it is more trouble that it
is worth. Seriously.
For 10+ years we have got on just
> By that I meant that several scripts which come with subversion are written
> in Python. They're pretty easy to replace with PHP scripts though if we do
> decide to use eg. the pecl svn extension. We would need to modify them
> extensively anyway if we were to use a system analogous to the one in
Antony Dovgal wrote:
On 23.09.2008 18:09, Maciek Sokolewicz wrote:
There has been a (short) discussion about this on the svn-migration
mailinglist (cc'd) which resulted in the recommendation of writing it
either in Python (because subversion uses that natively)
What exactly do you mea
On 23.09.2008 18:09, Maciek Sokolewicz wrote:
> There has been a (short) discussion about this on the svn-migration
> mailinglist (cc'd) which resulted in the recommendation of writing it
> either in Python (because subversion uses that natively)
What exactly do you mean by that?
Does Subversio
On 23.09.2008, at 16:05, Pierre Joye wrote:
hi!
For your information, there is a dedicated list:
http://news.php.net/svn.migration
and a dedicated IRC channel:
#php.svn (EFNet)
i have added this information to the wiki page:
http://wiki.php.net/vcs/cvstosvnmigration
regards,
Lukas Kahwe
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 23.09.2008, at 15:08, zoe wrote:
David Soria Parra wrote:
As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
system. Also Marcus proposed and I guess it was somehow accepted,
that t
hi!
For your information, there is a dedicated list:
http://news.php.net/svn.migration
and a dedicated IRC channel:
#php.svn (EFNet)
cheers,
--
Pierre
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:13 AM, Andrei Zmievski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whatever happened to the Subversion migration effort?
>
> -Andre
Hello all,
May I suggest something in this area?
I hope it will resolve some problems related to namespaces and classes
ambiguity.
Let's first take a look at the classes.
In-general they represent two things: scope and data.
Scope is a thing that can't be changed without compiler efforts and con
Lester Caine schreef:
Jochem Maas wrote:
in the long run functions and constants will be added to namespaces
... and then
the ambiguity issues will have to be dealt with. I believe Greg's
namespace member
concept will be required even if the syntax is/must/should/will
changed to
something eve
On 23.09.2008, at 15:08, zoe wrote:
David Soria Parra wrote:
As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
system. Also Marcus proposed and I guess it was somehow accepted,
that the new scripts are done
David Soria Parra wrote:
As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
system. Also Marcus proposed and I guess it was somehow accepted, that
the new scripts are done in Python and not in Perl.
I
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 14:54, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That being said, there is some overlap in features with existing
> functionality. Maybe if we schedule this for PHP 6, then we might want to
> mark a few things as deprecated in PHP 5.3.
Doesn't sound like a good idea.
T
On 23.09.2008, at 14:02, Lars Strojny wrote:
Hi Michael,
Am Montag, den 22.09.2008, 20:17 +0200 schrieb Michael Wallner:
[...]
I wonder what the general opinion is on adding pecl/http to the
main PHP
distribution? Many people have poked me in the past, so I guessed
it's
time to ask me an
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 20:17, Michael Wallner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder what the general opinion is on adding pecl/http to the main PHP
> distribution?
+1
-Hannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Michael,
Am Montag, den 22.09.2008, 20:17 +0200 schrieb Michael Wallner:
[...]
> I wonder what the general opinion is on adding pecl/http to the main PHP
> distribution? Many people have poked me in the past, so I guessed it's
> time to ask me and you that question once for all.
I would like
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Antony Dovgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 23.09.2008 13:28, David Soria Parra wrote:
>> As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
>> CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
>> system. Also Marcus proposed and I gu
Jochem Maas wrote:
in the long run functions and constants will be added to namespaces ...
and then
the ambiguity issues will have to be dealt with. I believe Greg's
namespace member
concept will be required even if the syntax is/must/should/will changed to
something everyone finds acceptable.
2008/9/23 Karsten Dambekalns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi.
>
> For what it's worth, my point of view:
>
> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>>
>> 1. Allow braces for namespaces. So, the syntax for namespaces will be:
>> a) namespace foo;
>> should be first (non-comment) statement in the file, namespace extend
hi Dmirty,
I really don't see a reason to change namespace syntax into a less
intuitive way.
I don't think the current implementation is intuitive, the ambiguity
issues,
(and possibly the name resolution order, although I can't grok what the
current
state of that is) are rather large WTFs.
On 23.09.2008 13:28, David Soria Parra wrote:
> As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
> CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
> system. Also Marcus proposed and I guess it was somehow accepted, that
> the new scripts are done in Python and n
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Whatever happened to the Subversion migration effort?
-Andrei
As far as I know the actual conversion is done, but a lot of the
CVSROOT/ scripts are not yet rewritten to fit the subversion hook
system. Also Marcus proposed and I guess it was somehow accepted, that
the
Hi.
For what it's worth, my point of view:
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
1. Allow braces for namespaces. So, the syntax for namespaces will be:
a) namespace foo;
should be first (non-comment) statement in the file, namespace extends
to the end of the file or next namespace declaration.
b) namespa
Hi.
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Yes. Changing :: into any other separator solves the functions/static
methods and constants ambiguity, but it also breaks intuitive syntax.
Well, I'd say those having problems to grok the syntax will have
problems getting the whole concept of namespaces. :)
That bei
Jochem Maas wrote:
> hi Dmirty,
>
>>
I really don't see a reason to change namespace syntax into a less
intuitive way.
>>> I don't think the current implementation is intuitive, the ambiguity
>>> issues,
>>> (and possibly the name resolution order, although I can't grok what the
>>> cur
Hi Stas,
Am Montag, den 22.09.2008, 12:45 -0700 schrieb Stanislav Malyshev:
[...]
> On the ZendCon, we (Marcus, Elizabeth, Andi and myself) had a talk about
> what we'd like to do with namespaces, and we arrived at the following
> conclusions, which we propose to implement in 5.3:
Thanks for th
Hi.
Michael Wallner wrote:
I wonder what the general opinion is on adding pecl/http to the main PHP
distribution? Many people have poked me in the past, so I guessed it's
time to ask me and you that question once for all.
Not that I have a lot to say here, but +∞ from my side as well.
Karste
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> On the ZendCon, we (Marcus, Elizabeth, Andi and myself) had a talk
> about what we'd like to do with namespaces, and we arrived at the
> following conclusions, which we propose to implement in 5.3:
>
> 1. Allow braces for namespaces.
> 2. Simpli
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On the ZendCon, we (Marcus, Elizabeth, Andi and myself) had a talk about
> what we'd like to do with namespaces, and we arrived at the following
> conclusions, which we propose to implement in 5.3:
>
> 1. Allow braces for namespaces. So, the syntax for namespac
39 matches
Mail list logo
