I couldn't agree more. I would transfer namespaces to phase one. namespaces are key consept when developing frameworks and libraries. These feature you mentioned in phase one are trivial in "real OOP" languages like Python, Java and C#, the lake of them make OOP developer think PHP is not a real production language. I am glad I got rid of this thought after working with cake for the last six month.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM, keymaster <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it would be nice to see cake 2.0 follow Li3 and Symfony's > > direction and push the boundaries a bit by moving to 5.3> only. > > Anyway you cut it, regardless of whether cake 2.0 is >5.3 only, or > 5.2+, there is still an incredibly urgent need for an interim release > to get the antiquated php4 limitations out, and get with php5. > > If that doesn’t happen soon, I fear no one will consider this > framework seriously for new adoption. > > So, > > Phase 1 - must contain basic things like: > > - interfaces, abstract classes > - exceptions (throw/catch) > - static vars and functions > - visibility keywords > - argument hinting > - autoloading > - interceptors > > Other things I think are do or die for phase 1: > - Lazy loading of all cake elements (models, helpers, components) > - Migration to PHPUnit > - Include DebugKit as part of the cake core > > Some people go crazy over the models returning data as objects instead > of arrays, but that doesn’t move me so much. > > Phase 2 - incorporation of 5.3 > > - namespaces, > - late static binding, > - lambda functions, > - closures, > - iterators > > Check out the new CakePHP Questions site http://cakeqs.org and help others with their CakePHP related questions. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en
