Hello, I as a userland library author, would appreciate namespaces quite a bit. Here is an idea:
namespace1..class() $x = new MyApp..MemberOrder(); -- Best regards, Jason mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Saturday, November 26, 2005, 3:52:35 PM, you wrote: GB> Hi all, GB> I have only one caveat with the \ separator, which is that it is a GB> little bit too similar to division with /, and can result in some GB> confusing code like: GB> <?php GB> namespace name1 { GB> class name2{} GB> } GB> define('name1', 1); GB> define('name2', 2); GB> $a = new name1\name2; GB> $b = name1/name2; ?>> GB> The same issue exists with all colon based separators (that sounds bad GB> when read the wrong way...) because of the ternary operator, and :: with GB> static classes/methods. GB> <?php GB> namespace name1 { GB> class name2{} GB> } GB> define('name1', 1); GB> define('name2', 2); GB> // this may be a parse error with the current namespace patch, GB> // but need not be if we use -> GB> class name1 GB> { GB> const name2 = 1; GB> } GB> $a = new name1:::name2; GB> $b = name1::name2; // do you see the difference? I get confused ?>> GB> What about using the T_OBJECT_OPERATOR? This is a parse error in GB> existing versions, and also implies some separation. GB> <?php GB> namespace name1 { GB> class name2{} GB> } GB> define('name1', 1); GB> define('name2', 2); GB> // this may be a parse error with the current namespace patch, GB> // but need not be if we use -> GB> class name1 GB> { GB> const name2 = 1; GB> } $a = new name1->>name2; GB> $b = name1::name2; ?>> GB> I also proposed on IRC using \\ as this is similar to netware driver GB> separators: GB> <?php GB> define('name1', 1); GB> define('name2', 2); GB> $a = new name1\\name2; GB> $b = name1/name2; ?>> GB> However, I know Andrei hated this :). I very much prefer the use of ->, GB> as this has the same advantage as :: of "rhyming" with current syntax. GB> Greg -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
