Greg was so kind to give me part of his awesome upcoming Pyrus code. He
actually has it running with both ':::' and '\' as namespace separators.
So I thought I'd help out a tiny tiny bit by giving you all the choice of
having a look at actual working code:
http://php.net/~helly/triplecolon.html
Quicker shift + ; x 3 than finding that freakin backslash on my HP 530 notebook.
> -Original Message-
> From: Nathan Rixham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 2:52 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Namespace is
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello all,
Greg was so kind to give me part of his awesome upcoming Pyrus code. He
actually has it running with both ':::' and '\' as namespace separators.
So I thought I'd help out a tiny tiny bit by giving you all the choice of
having a look at actual working code:
htt
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello all,
Greg was so kind to give me part of his awesome upcoming Pyrus code. He
actually has it running with both ':::' and '\' as namespace separators.
So I thought I'd help out a tiny tiny bit by giving you all the choice of
having a look at actual working code:
htt
Hello all,
Greg was so kind to give me part of his awesome upcoming Pyrus code. He
actually has it running with both ':::' and '\' as namespace separators.
So I thought I'd help out a tiny tiny bit by giving you all the choice of
having a look at actual working code:
http://php.net/~helly/tripl
Hi Steph
2008/10/18 Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> That wouldn't be the right thread to discuss the merits of a solution,
>> anyway. This thread is about the tally, and I'm trying to interpret
>> it.
>
> I did actually keep tabs on this. Yes the choice of separator played a part
> for many. How
Hello William,
Friday, October 17, 2008, 7:57:53 PM, you wrote:
> Marcel Esser wrote:
>> Using ::: as a namespace seperator would be great.
> A general rule of telephony dialing and other data input, three of
> the same character will too often be entered or recognized as two
> or four character
Hello Lukas,
--stas_s->option->because_I_could_not_read_that_code;
marcus
Thursday, October 16, 2008, 6:51:29 PM, you wrote:
> On 16.10.2008, at 16:14, Steph Fox wrote:
>> Please can those people who didn't already express a clear and
>> relevant
>> opinion, express it now? We don't ha
Hello Greg,
Many thanks for wirting a nice proposal. Now, I consider #2 and #4 as
no options, just as most everyone else. Regarding #3, I see it
contradicting our KISS approach. You can actually write code where an
Identifier in two scripts that share the same includes mean something
completely
Josh, please...
What I'm wondering is how many of those "many" voted for or against a
proposition for the wrong reason. For instance, how many users
understood that 2 is not about the use of triple colon? If someone
disregarded 2 because of the triple colon then it was a mistake, as
the triple c
2008/10/18 Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I did actually keep tabs on this. Yes the choice of separator played a part
> for many. However there were just as many who were happy with it - and the
> same would have applied whatever separator was used.
What I'm wondering is how many of those "many"
That wouldn't be the right thread to discuss the merits of a solution,
anyway. This thread is about the tally, and I'm trying to interpret
it.
I did actually keep tabs on this. Yes the choice of separator played a part
for many. However there were just as many who were happy with it - and the
I'm with Keryx. Although I work as a subcontractor for our main company, I
still have to teach some novice PHP programmers what this whole OOP paradigm
is all about, and making them go furter from the third solution that is C++
like, is a pain in the back. I'm in for readable/maintainable code.
Jo
2008/10/18 Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Josh Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 2008/10/18 Keryx Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Triple colon as in suggestion 1 and 2 is a readability nightmare - yes in
>>> both suggestions.
>>
>> Is that why you voted for 3? B
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Josh Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/10/18 Keryx Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Triple colon as in suggestion 1 and 2 is a readability nightmare - yes in
>> both suggestions.
>
> Is that why you voted for 3? Because triple colons are hard to read?
Is that
2008/10/18 Keryx Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Triple colon as in suggestion 1 and 2 is a readability nightmare - yes in
> both suggestions.
Is that why you voted for 3? Because triple colons are hard to read?
JD
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http:/
On 15.10.2008 22:36, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> This leaves me with the integer overflow failure and the array slice
> failure, but they seem to be very specific, and wouldn't normaly bite
> the PHP developer.
Right.
That said, we would still appreciate if you figure out the reasons
of these
Gregory Beaver wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
seen. Personally though I'd love to see stas' #1 get implemented and
"->" used for all functions in a namespace so..
one::step::two(); //always static method of class
one::step->two(); //always function of namespace.
But it's still ambiguous (only i
Nathan Rixham wrote:
> seen. Personally though I'd love to see stas' #1 get implemented and
> "->" used for all functions in a namespace so..
> one::step::two(); //always static method of class
> one::step->two(); //always function of namespace.
>
> But it's still ambiguous (only in a rarely thoug
Steph Fox skrev:
Would anyone still planning to vote please include a *brief* explanation
of why they're making the choices they're making?
OK. I'm in favour of number 3.
My main involvement with PHP is teaching it. I spend an endless amount
of time tracking down misplaced or omitted semi-col
Ronald Chmara wrote:
On Oct 17, 2008, at 3:53 AM, Nathan Rixham wrote:
*A Simpler Solution*
Force userland / general naming conventions in PHP.
# namespaces are always lowercase
# functions are always lowercase
# classes are always CamelCaps with initial uppercase letter enforced
thus:
//thi
21 matches
Mail list logo
