RE: [PHP-DEV] Namespaces in PHP 6 - ++$take
| From: | Andi Gutmans | Date: | Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:49:13 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP-DEV] Namespaces in PHP 6 - ++$take | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-26475@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Too long of an email to read :) but just wanted to give a heads-up that we
haven't forgotten about this (it's on the PHP 6 list).
We'll try and come with a proposal in the coming weeks with a way to do it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Coates [mailto:sean@caedmon.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 8:51 AM
> To: internals
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Namespaces in PHP 6 - ++$take
>
> Hello all,
>
> A number of factors have come together to prompt me to
> possibly commit mailing-list-suicide by re-opening the
> namespace issue.
>
> Last week at Zendcon, a number of PHP developers/community
> members chatted about namespaces in PHP 6. That chat was the
> prime motivator for this email, but the recent (be they
> misguided) complaints about symbol collisions in DateTime, as
> well as blog entries such as Jeff Moore's on maintainability [1].
>
> None of us chatting seemed to be able to come up with a good
> reason we don't yet have namespaces, other than frustration
> (the last time we discussed this, the thread became VERY long
> and drawn out), indecision (we couldn't seem to come to a
> decision on a suitable operator), and complacency.
>
> The way I see it is that implementing namespaces is a
> technical hurdle, and the reasons we haven't jumped it are
> political, not technical.
>
> So, let's deal with these 3 problems:
>
> Frustration: this thread will likely get long. Please avoid
> long-winded explanation of why you don't like the looks of
> "\" or how ":::" is hard to type. If you have something
> relevant to say, it's probably already been said [2][3].
> Please review the archives.
>
> Indecision: We couldn't decide on "\" or ":::". What this
> comes down to is that "\" is the only remaining operator that
> can be typed in a single keystroke on us_en keyboards. The
> other choice was ":::". I, for one, am OK with either
> operator. I think someone with appropriate (social) karma
> needs to simply commit to one or the other, and we'll make
> do... we always do.
>
> Complacency: Most of the time, I'm happy to maintain the
> status quo in PHP-land. However, the lack of namespaces is
> causing more trouble than its absence is preventing. I think
> most PHP users would agree that namespaces are a welcome
> addition, and without them, PHP suffers. Let's take this in
> small steps and implement optional userspace namespacing.
> There's no need to dive head-first into this and make
> dramatic moves like putting all core functions into a PHP
> namespace. Baby steps, please.
>
> And, in conclusion (thanks for reading this far; I've
> certainly exceeded the average non-code-paste post length, a
> few times over), remember that the core devs discussed this
> in Paris, last year [4]. They didn't come to a conclusion
> (note the use of "if"), though.
>
> Let's settle this political issue, please, so we can get on
> to solving the technical issues that will inevitably crop up.
>
> S
>
> [1]
> http://www.procata.com/blog/archives/2006/11/09/why-is-php-cod
> e-considered-hard-to-maintain/
> [2] http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.internals/20586
> [3] http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.internals/17484
> [4] http://php.net/~derick/meeting-notes.html#name-spaces
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To
> unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>