Re: [RFC] New core autoloading mechanism with support for function autoloading

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 11:39, Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be> wrote: > > On 2023-04-12 22:26, Rowan Tommins wrote: > > I could just about live with that example changing so that the > > fallback was cached, but I definitely don't think an explicit call > > like \foo\strlen('x') should become an implicit alias for > > \strlen('x'), which is apparently the current proposal. > > > > I really like the majority of this proposal, but right now would vote > > against it based on that. > > > I agree here, I missed that fact while reviewing the RFC as I just > understood it as an internal cache that \foo\strlen => \strlen, but > function_exists('foo\strlen') should still return false IMO until it is > defined, and once it is defined the cache should be busted. Thanks for the code example. Code is a great of being clear... particularly when I've gotten the wrong end of the stick. Yeah, that would be a BC break. For now, I'll update the RFC words to say that, but that means we need to go and do some thinking, to figure out how to proceed. cheers Dan Ack