Re: [Fwd: Re: [PHP-DEV] Renaming namespaces to packages]

Hello Ralph, thanks for the very good explanation, but don't expect to get anything back.... it is the same arguemnt I tried already - Expectations based on experience from existing languages. Rather then reachign for the straw of non existing features in other languages. best regards marcus Thursday, August 16, 2007, 8:24:10 PM, you wrote: > Stas, > Namespace implementations for languages have been around for decades > in one form or another. People use the languages they are used to > developing in to demonstrate their points on how it should work, and > what it should be called when it works a certain way. Its 2007. Given > that we have the benefit of seeing how other languages have attempted to > solve the problem over the years, we can then devise our own > implementation to satisfy the demand. We cannot ignore other languages > implementations that got us to where we are today in language/compiler > design. > At the end of the day, there are two camps of people for naming: > packages vs. namespaces. > You seem to be missing the point that having braces is not for vanity's > sake, and is truly important to the implementation thus lending itself > to actual naming of the implementation. > a) BY NOT HAVING BRACES you have subscribed to FILE BASED scope > termination, thus tying the SCOPING of namespaces to a FILE. > b) BY HAVING BRACES you would be subscribing to a model that terminates > scope of namespace constructs to current scope they are defined within. > The former lends itself to being called a "package" the later lends > itself to being called a "namespace". > You did not answer my other questions on multiple namespaces per file, > and interactive php namespace usage. > -ralph > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >>> OO. And anyway, are we struggling to find excuses here? Can we in no way >>> ever at least try to be consistent in anything we do? That JS argument >>> is an >> >> How "consistent" had acquired a meaning of "doing it my way"? >> There's >> nothing inconsistent in the name "namespace" and it is very consistent >> with what people understand - I quoted wiki on that. I'm still waiting >> for that non-"C++ does it with braces" argument btw. Best regards, Marcus