2009/1/22 Larry Garfield <[email protected]>:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2009 2:19:53 pm Greg Beaver wrote:
>> 2) adds new syntax to namespaces
>
> If I'm reading the RFC properly, it extends the existing syntax in a logical
> way without introducing any new reserved words. My only question then would
> be should we change the way classes are imported to use the keyword "class",
> to parallel this syntax? Eg:
>
> use class Foo\Bar;
> use function Foo\fanciness;
>
> If we're concerned about breaking code written for the existing alphas,
> perhaps "class" could be implied if not specified, so that we can recommend
> using it but not break existing code? I'm not sure if there's a performance
> concern there.
> --
> Larry Garfield
> [email protected]
I like conformity. If my voice counts, I would be happy to accept this
as a BC. If necessary, all for "class" to be implied until V6 or V5.4
and mark it as an E_STRICT or E_DEPRECATED ("use Foo\Bar" to include a
class is deprecated, use "use class Foo\Bar" instead) sort of thing.
This allows current code to run. Tells the alpha testers there code is
in need of an upgrade, and gives them time to do so.
Richard.
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
