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
Hello Andi,
Wednesday, March 26, 2008, 7:12:18 AM, you wrote:
> In general I'd prefer one namespace per-file, at least as a best
> practice and common advertised use. For this case it doesn't really
> matter too much whether it's with or without brackets. My preference is
> without because then y
Can't both (brackets and non) be supported? I have some sick people in
my own company that would LOVE if they could embed multiple namespaces
in the same file. In circles around my own cubicle, engineers prefer
to write one class per namespace, per file, as God intended. Various
Perl, Pyth
In general I'd prefer one namespace per-file, at least as a best
practice and common advertised use. For this case it doesn't really
matter too much whether it's with or without brackets. My preference is
without because then you just stick it at the top and don't have an
extra level of indentation
+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
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
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
18 matches
Mail list logo
