Re: Re: Namespace resolution rules has been changed?

"Stan Vassilev | FM" wrote: > For me the only way to make it clear to both humans and parsers alike is > the filepath semantics, in all places, including use. It's not perfect, > there's no completely problem-free solution, but "prepend \ for absolute > path" is able to become muscle memory, while other mixed solutions I've > seen are more confusing and require more thinking: "wait in this context > what was what?". My point exactly. This was a real pain in the ass while converting from old to new resolution rules (though I now this is a one-time example). However i was explaining the new resolution rules to my co-workers recently and it was aparent the context dependant resolution isn't clear, while understanding: "it's always relative to current namespace" is simple and easy. Also most people are familiar with filepath semantics so there is a obvious point of reference (and confusion when it's not consistent). > But this introduces a new keyword: nameof, which could clash with > function/class/constant "nameof" in existing source code. I could suggest [...] > But it's definitely in-your-face issue while using namespaced code. I'm not shure how big of a problem "nameof" clashing would be, however a way to get fully qualified name is a nessesity in my opinion - i strugle with this in my framework too. Gregs suggestion of __NAMESPACE__ concatenated solution (if i understand it correctly) isn't one accualy because __NAMESPACE__ resolves to current namespace; and "typeof" might (and probably usually will) be used on aliased classes not nessecerely from current namespace. m.