Re: Missing P in PPP as in package?!

Hello, On 03/29/2003 10:41 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:

Maybe that is why the output of the example in that page is a parse error! ;-)

No, the machine runs PHP 4, the code is PHP 5 only.

Of course (notice the smiley ;-) ). Maybe Sebastian needs to upgrade his PHP 5 version or at least agree on nomenclature with Sterling! :-) Seriously, this just reinforce my point that it is odd that that package level access restrictions is out because according to Andi it is confusing, but then other even more confusing features are added like nested namespaced or whatever you want to call them. It seems to me that the reasoning is not being done by real OOP practioners, ie, people that develop OOP based applications every day or else they would feel the need for features like package level access restrictions. Never mind, I just wanted to know if the reasoning for not having that feature had to due to any run-time performance loss and it seems that is not the reason. As I said before it is not important for me. I am just evaluating if there is any point in making MetaL generate PHP 5 optimized code. MetaL is used by Metastorage to generate optimized code persistence layers to support rapid development of enterprise level application, which is one thing that PHP seriously lacks. http://www.meta-language.net/metastorage.html If there is no point in generating PHP 5 optimized code as an option, I hope PHP 4 compliant that MetaL generates will work well with PHP 5. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos