Re: PEAR/PECL and Namespaces

Stig, this sounds good to me. the classes (not necessarily the C code) are already (mostly) PEAR CS compliant. the classes are actually a superset of the current I18N support in PEAR, but since the interfaces are different between the two packages, i think there needs to be a general discussion on how a merger/replacement can occur. in any case, it'll be a few more months before the its production-ready, so still there's some time left for that issue to be resolved. l0t3k "Stig S. Bakken" <ssb@fast.no> wrote in message news:1050276333.1202.27.camel@kirin.trondheim.fast.no... > On Sun, 2003-04-13 at 01:04, l0t3k wrote: > Why not make a regular PEAR package with C code? All you really need to > do is follow the naming standards for classes and such. Hey, if it > implements the same stuff as some existing package written in PHP, the C > implementation could even replace it (or parts of it). > > - Stig >