> I don't see how it could change in the future, but that's
> just my 2c :)

Thanks, thats all I was really looking for. The status of the terms, cause
if they're not being reserved then I would like to continue using them -- at
my own risk. As Marcus points out, its might not be the best idea to
implement function/classes with keyword names from other languages but the
terms best describe my problem. Maybe I'll prefix them.

EOT

-Justin


"Zeev Suraski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> At 21:06 16/08/2004, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> >Hello Justin,
> >
> >Monday, August 16, 2004, 4:08:46 PM, you wrote:
> >
> > > Zeev,
> >
> > > I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and
> > found
> > > allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about
its
> > > conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that
that
> > > uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
> > > dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
> > > wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use
before I
> > > port all my code to php5.
> >
> >There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or
whatever)
> >have something like namespaces or packages which require at least the
> >keyword 'import'. That's an example for the reason i never use names that
> >are used as keywords in other languages.
>
> FWIW, I have no idea what Marcus is talking about :)
> The reasons that brought us to remove namespaces in the first place are
> conceptual, so I don't see how it could change in the future, but that's
> just my 2c :)
>
> Justin - unfortunately you'd have to read quite a few threads on the
> mailing list (the engine2 one) in order to understand why namespaces were
> removed, because unlike most 'standard' problems, this one is mostly
> conceptual, rather than technical.  The short version of the story is that
> 'import' was perceived as something very different by different people -
> and it appeared to only be useful if implemented in a way that completely
> contradicts the 'spirit' of PHP (i.e., it's inconsistent with the way
> include/require behave, for instance).
>
> A good (albeit long) thread to start with would be
> http://www.zend.com/lists/engine2/200304/msg00164.html.
>
> Zeev

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to