On 14.10.2008, at 21:20, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:

On 14.10.2008, at 21:01, Steph Fox wrote:

We are in alpha indeed, and still looking at proposals, and still without consensus. The last thing I'd want is to see namespace support pushed under the carpet, but I'd rather see it at this stage of development as part of the PHP 6 development cycle (as originally

Why? What would happen then that can't happen now?

What would happen if we give the namespace implementation a chance to mature is that it can be delivered as a fully-fledged language element rather than a partially-fledged and potentially flawed one.

Both of these approaches have some uncleanness to them. If functions and constants get pushed to the global namespace while classes end up in the current namespace on include it can lead to some surprises. At the same time offering an ambiguous syntax to solve ambiguity when it occurs is also not beautiful. If we try out one of them in alpha3 and are unhappy I would not want an alpha4 to try out yet another one. But we will have the alpha3 either way at this point. So we could say lets try out the one that most people prefer for alpha3. If it sucks, we kick it out and move on.

My fear is that once this is in a release (and even if it's just an alpha), the "public" pressure to keep it will be too big.


Then we can alternatively push it to PHP 6 or drop the idea all together. I know that Dmitry and Greg were both thinking over alternative approaches, which did not yet come to a conclusion. Most of that revolves around other separators between or around namespaces. So we can keep cooking that.

I believe everyone here will agree that this decision is pretty crucial. And if Dmitry and Greg have alternative approaches in the pipeline that need further pondering, then we should wait until they either finalized their proposals or declared them infeasible themselves.

Why the rush. I really don't understand it. Please, no half-arsed compromises.

Or, as this little green dude once said, "do, or do not. there is no try."


- David

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to