Re: my last attempt at sanity with namespaces

Hello all, Sorry to post here being an "outsider". I didn't post because I know nothing about the internals, really. However after some incomplete thought I have a not very thorough suggestion about the ambiguity issue mentioned in the RFC wiki. I would like to ask if this is possible. Let me quote the challenge here: <quote> // is this class one::step or namespace one::step? one::step::two(); </quote> Is is possible that the engine first looks for classes, then namespaces? So "one::step::two();" should always result in: Namespace: one Class: step Static Method: two Now the "ambiguity" is resolved. If we want to really mean namespace "one::step" and function two(), one must explicitly write the following: (one::step)::two(); Yes, parenthesis, just like when we want to write (1 + 2) * 3. So my question is: can parenthesis play a part in namespace resolving? There can be problem, e.g. I don't know if the engine can distinguish it from typecasting without many efforts. But anyway I hope this doesn't sound too stupid :). T >Hi, > >http://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaceissues > >Read it and discuss. Let's be clear people: the technical problems in >namespaces are limited and solvable. The problems in the political >environment surrounding them may not be. Wouldn't politics be a >stupid-ass reason to remove namespaces? > >Greg