Hi Lars, I don't really like the idea of such ghost features that don't actually do anything. It sounds like it would just introduce wrong mappings. And since those other constructs *do* share a namespace it technically wouldn't make sense to make a distinction between them.
Any other thoughts? Regards, Igor On Jul 22, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Lars Strojny <l...@strojny.net> wrote: > Hi Igor, > > I like the proposal but one cosmetic thing: if we allow "use function …", > shouldn't we allow "use class …"/"use abstract class …"/"use interface > …"/"use namespace …" as well? It would be just syntactic sugar and not > checked at all, but it would allow for nice symmetry in the use part of a > file. > > cu, > Lars -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
