Re: prefixing classes

On 4/27/06, Justin Patrin <papercrane@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/27/06, Lukas Smith <smith@pooteeweet.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > we need to address this topic .. all new classes should be prefixed with > > "PEAR_" to properly namespace them away from internal objects. > > > > Huh? Since when has this been a PEAR requirement? I understand the > namespacing issue, but this will make PEAR packages far more unweildy. > I'm generally against such a practice...DB_DataObject_FormBuilder and > Structures_Datagrid are far long enough for me. If a class name would > collide with an internal object it should just be renamed. It is a requirement for base pacakges like File, Config, Calendar, File, Date, Cache and many other common names. I do not like "PEAR" as prefix, I prefer something shorter and nicer like "P" or "PE". PEAR itself (and its direct related tools) may not use a prefix, but I do not really care right now, especially as ther is no hurry for these packages. I have prepared a list of possible packages affected by this issue. I'm cleaning it and adding some comments, expect it later tonight. --Pierre