Quite. It does appear as though, as a group, that you're struggling with the entire concept of namespaces. As demonstrated by this discussion, the resolution issues, the separator farce, and so on.
It may be due to weaknesses in the PHP engine as a whole, I don't know... but it strikes me that most of these issues should be trivial ones, or ones that could be eliminated simply by approaching language design decisions with some common sense. In .NET, I can stick an Array class into my own namespace, extending the System.Array type if I want to and use it in my code without issue. Why can I not do that here? Is it simply that you're so worried about backwards compatibility that you feel that you can't make the necessary changes to the language to implement something fully? Dan On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Ben Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Isn't the ability to do that one of the biggest reasons for having > > namespaces? To avoid having to fill your class names with junk. > > The examples are namespaced appropriately, they tell the developer that > > it's > > a Helper for Arrays in the MyFramework framework. I shouldn't need to > > suffix > > the class name with 'Helper' to reconfirm that, just because the PHP > > engine > > doesn't like it. > > "This thread really should be re-titled to "allow reserved words as a > classname or not". Then perhaps the only logical response to the question > would be so obvious that there would be no thread... oo-er..." > > I think you might be deliberately missing Dan's point here: array is a > reserved word because it is not namespaced. If the PHP native function > array() was namespaced to PHPCore\array() then Dan could create a class or > function called array under his own namespace. This is exactly what > namespacing affords us. > > array() is only a reserved word because it is not a directly accessable > native datatype. If array() was an object Array, this wouldn't be a > problem. > > This namespaces issues highlights the very fundamental issues with PHP, and > glib, childish responses like yours only serve to score points. > > Grow up and join the conversation. > > > Ben Davies | Lead Developer | Stickyeyes > 6th Floor, > West One, > Wellington Street, > Leeds, LS1 1BA > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 0113 391 2929 | <telephone> | Fax 0113 391 2939 > > This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential or > otherwise protected from disclosure. It must not be used by, or its > contents > copied or disclosed to persons other than the intended recipient. Any > liability (in negligence or otherwise) arising from any third party acting, > or refraining from acting, on any information contained in this e-mail is > excluded. The views expressed may not be official company policy, but > instead, the personal views of the originator. If you have received this > e-mail in error please notify the sender and delete the e-mail. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steph Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 06 November 2008 11:01 > To: Dan; troels knak-nielsen > Cc: Larry Garfield; internals@lists.php.net; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Call it: allow reserved words in a class or not? > > > Isn't the ability to do that one of the biggest reasons for having > > namespaces? To avoid having to fill your class names with junk. > > The examples are namespaced appropriately, they tell the developer that > > it's > > a Helper for Arrays in the MyFramework framework. I shouldn't need to > > suffix > > the class name with 'Helper' to reconfirm that, just because the PHP > > engine > > doesn't like it. > > This thread really should be re-titled to "allow reserved words as a > classname or not". Then perhaps the only logical response to the question > would be so obvious that there would be no thread... oo-er... > > - Steph > >
