Re: [Concept] Flip relative function lookup order (global, then local)

> On 23 Aug 2024, at 15:29, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] <imsop.php@rwec.co.uk> wrote: > > having global as the default mode (even if we provide an option for local) is much less > disruptive to existing code. Hi Rowan, I don't disagree with this summary of the current state, but I think this misses an important factor: namespaced functions are currently nowhere near as popular as namespaced classes, and a significant part of that is almost certainly because we don't have function autoloading, nor any kind of visibility controls for functions (eg package private). Making relative function names do the opposite of relative class names sounds like a great way to permanently kill any prospects of encouraging developers to use regular namespaced functions in place of static classes as "bag of functions", which is what we keep hearing we should use - most notably on a recent RFC to embody the concept of a static class. So we're told "no don't use classes for static functions like that, use proper functions". We already can't autoload them which makes them less appealing, and less practical. In a world where global functions take precedence over local ones because some people don't like writing a single \ character, autoloading would be a moot point because if you preference global functions you're implicitly telling developers they shouldn't write namespaced functions, by making them harder and less intuitive to use. Cheers Stephen