Steph Fox wrote:
Hi Tony,
I don't think Stas is implying not to test it.
Which proposal do you think he's implying not to test? And which of the
other three proposals on offer do you think should go out there, bearing
in mind that once the thing's released it can't be changed?
I think that is the bottom line!
Can anybody come up with a good case for why functions and constant should be
'thrown out with the bath water' ?
If there is a majority for ignoring a major section of PHP and restricting new
stuff to be only Class based, then we can safely rip functions and constant
out and ignore them and go with the current restricted code?
I get the feeling however that if namespace is to be usable in the SHORT term,
then wrapping functions and constants is essential simply to wrap legacy stuff
while it is converted to objects?
If there was a clear solution to a complete handling of namespace, then there
would not be a problem, but currently there are some big holes that can not be
plugged later if the CURRENT code is released?
So put it back on the drawing board and try and plug the holes rather than
holding up 5.3. While there may have been talking about namespace for years,
the problems were never fully appreciated? Now that they have been documented
and some of the pros and cons discussed, it is clear that a decision to force
the current solution through will cause as many problems later on?
--
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
