Re: [RFC] Importing namespaced functions
| From: | Igor Wiedler | Date: | Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:51:11 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Importing namespaced functions | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-68279@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi Lars,
I don't really like the idea of such ghost features that don't actually do anything. It
sounds like it would just introduce wrong mappings. And since those other constructs *do* share a
namespace it technically wouldn't make sense to make a distinction between them.
Any other thoughts?
Regards,
Igor
On Jul 22, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net> wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> I like the proposal but one cosmetic thing: if we allow "use function …",
> shouldn't we allow "use class …"/"use abstract class …"/"use
> interface …"/"use namespace …" as well? It would be just syntactic sugar and not
> checked at all, but it would allow for nice symmetry in the use part of a file.
>
> cu,
> Lars