Re: Allow functions in namespaces?

Hi Jessie I think there is no need for functions in namespaces because if you want to group functions, you can use a class. I think the destination of the namespaces is just to group classes together. btw: nice patch :) -- Benny On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 23:50 -0400, Jessie Hernandez wrote: > Right now, my patch is complete as respects classes inside namespaces, > simple import, namespace imports, etc. I just made a few changes locally to > see how feasible it was to allow functions inside namespaces, and it was > actually very simple. Like classes, the functions internally are prefixed > with the namespace name and a colon, e.g.: > > <?php > namespace test_ns > { > function test_func > { > echo "hello!\n"; > } > } > > test_func(); // generates an error, 'test_func' does not exist > > test_ns:test_func(); // prints "hello!" > ?> > > > I haven't done anything with functions as regards imports, and I think it > would be difficult/useless to do so. Simple imports might be easy, but what > about namespace imports? There is no such concept as __autoload for > functions, so namespace imports for functions would be discarded. Also, if > you import foo:bar, you don't know if this is a function or a class. The > former syntax of "import function/class foo from bar" would need to be > used, and this syntax was very ugly IMHO. > > So, I ask, would it be useful to have functions inside namespaces and only > use it as above? Imports would only work for classes, and the only change > would be that you can reference functions with a colon (of course, just > like classes, you cannot declare a function name with a colon, only > reference it). > > Let me know what you guys think. My Beta 2 patch is working great as it is, > and I suspect the majority of the users who want namespaces is to simply > group/organize their classes anyways. > > > Regards, > > Jessie Hernandez >