Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
At this point I guess we have the choice between:
1) rip them out
2) status quo
3) Stas proposal
4) Dmitrys proposal
Again I hope that Stas/Dmitry will give us an insight about their proposals,
though Stas proposal might or might not see any changes.
Stas wrote up an RFC about the two proposals:
http://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaceref
Now I finally figured out what the two things are without having to real
a gazillion pointless posts it makes it easier to formulate my point of
view.
From my own point of view - which may well be flawed - I AM still seeing
'namespace' as a stepping stone to better code, but in order to achieve that
*I* am thinking that legacy sections get wrapped in a namespace while other
sections are developed. To that end, wrapping legacy functions and constant
does seem essential SHORT TERM, so not having them would seem to me to make
take-up of the concept hamstrung?
Am I being totally out of line with that idea? Is there a way to achieve the
same result with the current offering?
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
