Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

Joshua Eichorn a écrit :

Trimming to point out a major misunderstanding of namespaces.

*sigh*, thanks Josh but I know what namespaces are, I used them *way* before php5.

David Jean Louis wrote:

Hey there, I really prefer the initial proposal (replace all _ with ::), IMHO the svn:externals problem should not dictate the namespace naming decision. With the current proposal, what if I want to do the following ? <?php // my script want to use Console_CommandLine *and* Console_Color use PEAR2::Console; $commandline = new CommandLine();

$color       = new Color();

// etc... ?>

Namespaces have no relation to one another, each and every class has to be brought in with a use line.

No, this is just plain wrong: 1. namespaces *have* a relation in the sense they share the same root: in my example "PEAR2::Console", so (even if my example is bad chosen) I want to be able to do: <?php use PEAR2::Console; $a = new Console::CommandLine(); $b = new Console::Color(); ?> (sorry, Console:: prefix was missing in my previous mail). ok ? 2. the real benefit of the "use" keyword is to work inside a namespace without having to type the "path" each time you want to use something that lives under it. If, as you say, "each and every class has to be brought in with a use line", well... what's the point of this "use" keyword ?!

so it would be use pear2::console_commandline::CommandLine; use pear2::console_color::Color There is no benefit to deep trees, these aren't Java packages or anything hugely useful. They are a method to type shorter class names in code and thats it. Hmm... see my "drivers" or "adapters" example in my previous mail.

I don't want to type the same path every time, and I don't want to have a "use" statement for each class I instanciate... Let's take the example of Services_Shipping: In reply to Kristopher, you mention the namespaces would be: pear2::services_shipping_ups::Driver pear2::services_shipping_dhl::Driver IMO this is wrong (and even cause a conflict if you want to instanciate the two drivers, unless you use the "as" construct). to me: <?php use pear2::services::shipping::driver; $ups = new driver::UPS(); $dhl = new driver::DHL(); ?> is way better than: <?php use pear2::services_shipping_ups::Driver as UPSDriver; use pear2::services_shipping_dhl::Driver as DHLDriver; $ups = new UPSDriver(); $dhl = new DHLDriver(); ?> Now I even more prefer the initial proposal (s/_/::/) :p -- David