Re: my last attempt at sanity with namespaces

Edmund Tam wrote:

(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?

see this is the problem and where the solution should be (imo) mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace <<makes sense class::method() <<makes sense it's when you join the two together that the ambiguity comes in so the solution should be some way of visually and technically defining where a namespace-path ends only solutions are: parenthesis around the namespace-path: (mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace)class::method() or a separator at the end of the namespace-path (greg's option 2) mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace:::class::method() [:::] mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace:>class::method() [:>] mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace class::method() [ (space)] mynamespace::anotherspace::somespace..class::method() [..] anything clear and unambiguous visually!