Re: [VOTE] Exceptions in the engine

2015-02-24 13:29 GMT+01:00 Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>: > Hi all, > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Dennis Birkholz <dennis@birkholz.biz> > wrote: > > > Am 23.02.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Nikita Popov: > > > A second vote will decide whether to use a BaseException based > > inheritance > > > hierarchy. This vote uses a simple majority. > > > > I like this RFC and hope it passes. I am a little concerned about > > littering the global namespace. It would be preferable to have a single > > namespace that is reserved for all build in classes (like \PHP) that > > contains all classes like exceptions. The name BaseException seems to be > > a very common one: > > >;tjâë%—ä6 > > Phttps://github.com/search?l=php&q=baseexception&type=Code finds about > > 14k matches, so this may be a huge BC break if the actual class name is > > not changed. > > > > It seems AbstractException is better choice for BC. > > > > https://github.com/search?l=php&q=abstractexception&ref=searchresults&type=Code > > There are 661 matches, but most of them are using namespace unlike > BaseException. > > > Someone proposed to use namespace for all PHP functions/classes and > clean global namespace up. This gives us flexibility also. e.g Providing > compatibility to older functions/classes to mitigate BC impact. > > Use of namespace is BC by itself, but it may be better to consider > namespace > use for internal features. We don't have much time, so it may be for > PHP8... > > All "none" namespaced classnames are IMO reserved for PHP.... So if you develop an application/classes you (should) always prefix a vendor/project namesapce. But +1 for PHP8+ for a PHP namespace. For PHP7 please do not do too much at once.