Too long of an email to read :) but just wanted to give a heads-up that we haven't forgotten about this (it's on the PHP 6 list). We'll try and come with a proposal in the coming weeks with a way to do it.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Sean Coates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 8:51 AM > To: internals > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Namespaces in PHP 6 - ++$take > > Hello all, > > A number of factors have come together to prompt me to > possibly commit mailing-list-suicide by re-opening the > namespace issue. > > Last week at Zendcon, a number of PHP developers/community > members chatted about namespaces in PHP 6. That chat was the > prime motivator for this email, but the recent (be they > misguided) complaints about symbol collisions in DateTime, as > well as blog entries such as Jeff Moore's on maintainability [1]. > > None of us chatting seemed to be able to come up with a good > reason we don't yet have namespaces, other than frustration > (the last time we discussed this, the thread became VERY long > and drawn out), indecision (we couldn't seem to come to a > decision on a suitable operator), and complacency. > > The way I see it is that implementing namespaces is a > technical hurdle, and the reasons we haven't jumped it are > political, not technical. > > So, let's deal with these 3 problems: > > Frustration: this thread will likely get long. Please avoid > long-winded explanation of why you don't like the looks of > "\" or how ":::" is hard to type. If you have something > relevant to say, it's probably already been said [2][3]. > Please review the archives. > > Indecision: We couldn't decide on "\" or ":::". What this > comes down to is that "\" is the only remaining operator that > can be typed in a single keystroke on us_en keyboards. The > other choice was ":::". I, for one, am OK with either > operator. I think someone with appropriate (social) karma > needs to simply commit to one or the other, and we'll make > do... we always do. > > Complacency: Most of the time, I'm happy to maintain the > status quo in PHP-land. However, the lack of namespaces is > causing more trouble than its absence is preventing. I think > most PHP users would agree that namespaces are a welcome > addition, and without them, PHP suffers. Let's take this in > small steps and implement optional userspace namespacing. > There's no need to dive head-first into this and make > dramatic moves like putting all core functions into a PHP > namespace. Baby steps, please. > > And, in conclusion (thanks for reading this far; I've > certainly exceeded the average non-code-paste post length, a > few times over), remember that the core devs discussed this > in Paris, last year [4]. They didn't come to a conclusion > (note the use of "if"), though. > > Let's settle this political issue, please, so we can get on > to solving the technical issues that will inevitably crop up. > > S > > [1] > http://www.procata.com/blog/archives/2006/11/09/why-is-php-cod > e-considered-hard-to-maintain/ > [2] http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.internals/20586 > [3] http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.internals/17484 > [4] http://php.net/~derick/meeting-notes.html#name-spaces > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To > unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
