Re: Constants in namesapces
| From: | Antony Dovgal | Date: | Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:11:23 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Constants in namesapces | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-31855@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 22.08.2007 21:50, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
I believe useful things should not bring confusion, which is clearly the case. We do have runtime constants created with define(), so the critical need in runtime namespace constants is quite questionable to me.I don't think it's _required_ for the constants to be useful.Well, depends on how you define requirements. Having out-of-class constants is not required either - Java does fine without it :) However, thinking about how people would use namespaces, I think it would be very useful.
And btw we have some precedent of reusing syntax - "static" means different things as "static function" and "static variable", and very well might to acquire yet another meaning as static:: IIRC. I don't say it's necessarily good thing, but it's not without precedent.Inconsistencies and mistakes done in the past cannot be a reason to create more of them, so I don't understand why you even mentioned 'static'. -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal