On 17/07/2020 02:58, Levi Morrison via internals wrote:
2. I don't think this is solving any problems, really:
- Code can move from PHP land to an extension and back again.
Should the namespace change just because it moved one way or the
other? I vote no.
This is not what the RFC proposes. The point of \Ext is that there would
be no need to rename them when moving in or out of core.
I'm strongly in the "make namespace short and flat" camp. Deeply
nested namespaces make more sense when you need to distinguish between
projects within a company, for a contrived example
`Amazon\WebServices\SDK`. I can see there being multiple projects with
Amazon, and I can see there being multiple WebServices projects.
Removing a namespace segment doesn't make a lot of sense either,
except for perhaps collapsing the first two to `AWS` but this is just
another point to my short and flat camp. This deeply nested company
organization is not the territory we are in as a project, so we should
keep it simple and keep our namespace short and simple.
How flat would you want it to be? This RFC proposes 1 level before the
name of the feature, either PHP or Ext depending on its location. The
purpose of that one level is to avoid extensions trampling into multiple
userspace naming areas.
Mark Randall
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
