Hi,
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 22:36 +0100, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> we all were asked to stop discussing syntax of namespaces as we were told
> that we would decide after the namespace functionality was fully implemented.
> Now I think that the functionallity is pretty much settled we should
> revisi
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 23:35 -0700, Paul Chandler wrote:
> Can't both (brackets and non) be supported?
NO! This just creates confusion.
johannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> language out there that is in use and has anything like that. And even more
> scary to me, you did not solve anything by this because people still could
> write code prior to the namespace keyword. So no matter what we are screwed
?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/workspace/php5$ cat
Which I consider pretty bad. So
should we reconsider the limitation and have an anonymous namespace that
this code goes to? If not, how do we enforce this rule? How do we explain
that to users?
marcus
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Gregory Beaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
refer "namespace" as a keyword.
My 2 cents.
Andi
-Original Message-
From: Gregory Beaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 3:01 PM
To: Marcus Boerger
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Namespace syntax decision
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello
PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 3:01 PM
> To: Marcus Boerger
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Namespace syntax decision
>
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
> > Hello Internals,
> >
> > we all were asked to stop discussing syntax of namesp
+1 to multiple namespaces with brackets.
Dimitar Isusov
Same here. Multiple namespaces w/o brackets are just wrong.
David
Am 25.03.2008 um 02:44 schrieb Ben Ramsey:
On 3/23/08 5:05 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Johannes Schlüter schrieb:
I said in some previous post I won't like multiple namespaces per
file
using the 2nd syntax. So imo: either
On 3/23/08 5:05 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Johannes Schlüter schrieb:
I said in some previous post I won't like multiple namespaces per file
using the 2nd syntax. So imo: either on ns per file and the 2nd syntax
or allow multiple and use brackets. And then I prefer the latter.
I second tha
Johannes Schlüter schrieb:
I said in some previous post I won't like multiple namespaces per file
using the 2nd syntax. So imo: either on ns per file and the 2nd syntax
or allow multiple and use brackets. And then I prefer the latter.
I second that emotion.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
Hi!
Why can't we stick to consistency ? PHP (classes, functions,
I think "consistency" became, as many other previously useful words, to
mean "agree with me" on this list, so it's meaningless.
Greg? Stas? Dmitry? Could we get a "resume" of the backstage talks you
guys spoke about? I'm sure
Em Sáb, 2008-03-22 às 17:19 -0500, Gregory Beaver escreveu:
> Felipe Pena wrote:
> > Em Sex, 2008-03-21 às 17:01 -0500, Gregory Beaver escreveu:
> >>> 1) namespace foo { }
> >> This is acceptable if nothing can exist outside namespace foo {} except
> >> declare and other namespace declarations.
> >
Felipe Pena wrote:
> Em Sex, 2008-03-21 às 17:01 -0500, Gregory Beaver escreveu:
>>> 1) namespace foo { }
>> This is acceptable if nothing can exist outside namespace foo {} except
>> declare and other namespace declarations.
>>
>
> Indeed!
>
> Here's my try:
> http://felipe.ath.cx/diff/namespace
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 22:36 +0100, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> PHP is very close to Java and C++ in terms of Syntax. And many of our users
> are familiar with one or even both of them. Also we have a tendency to
> especially take syntax from those two or be in line with those two
> languages. That
Why can't we stick to consistency ? PHP (classes, functions,
interfaces, abstracts, etc) are all done the same way. What is the
"need" of changing this ?
I see reasons like :
- I don't like indentatation (Answer to that: PHP must make you quite
sad then... and I can't imagine what python makes yo
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Internals,
>
> we all were asked to stop discussing syntax of namespaces as we were told
> that we would decide after the namespace functionality was fully implemented.
> Now I think that the functionallity is pretty much settled we should
> revisit the syntax. We a
Hello Ryan,
Saturday, March 22, 2008, 6:50:36 PM, you wrote:
> Lars Strojny wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 16:29 +0100 schrieb Marcus Boerger:
>> [...]
>>> looks pretty good to me. Let's see what other responses we get by late
>>> wedensday.
>>
>> I like the current syntax and
Lars Strojny wrote:
Hi,
Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 16:29 +0100 schrieb Marcus Boerger:
[...]
looks pretty good to me. Let's see what other responses we get by late
wedensday.
I like the current syntax and don't think it is confusing. So -1 for
changing it.
cu, Lars
I'm also -1 on this one
Hi,
Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 16:29 +0100 schrieb Marcus Boerger:
[...]
> looks pretty good to me. Let's see what other responses we get by late
> wedensday.
I like the current syntax and don't think it is confusing. So -1 for
changing it.
cu, Lars
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein dig
Hello Felipe,
looks pretty good to me. Let's see what other responses we get by late
wedensday.
marcus
Saturday, March 22, 2008, 12:46:08 PM, you wrote:
> Em Sex, 2008-03-21 às 17:01 -0500, Gregory Beaver escreveu:
>> > 1) namespace foo { }
>>
>> This is acceptable if nothing can exist outsi
Em Sex, 2008-03-21 às 17:01 -0500, Gregory Beaver escreveu:
> > 1) namespace foo { }
>
> This is acceptable if nothing can exist outside namespace foo {} except
> declare and other namespace declarations.
>
Indeed!
Here's my try:
http://felipe.ath.cx/diff/namespace.diff
http://felipe.ath.cx/dif
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Internals,
>
> we all were asked to stop discussing syntax of namespaces as we were told
> that we would decide after the namespace functionality was fully implemented.
> Now I think that the functionallity is pretty much settled we should
> revisit the syntax. We a
22 matches
Mail list logo
