:: is taken, but why not do it the C++ way? It also uses :: for both classes and namespaces.
Zeev At 21:35 30-09-01, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote: >[Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > > Hey, > > > > I just started playing around with the parser to support the > > namespaces syntax Stig laid out in his RFC. I think I've thought of an > > ambiguity (with constants) which makes me wonder how feasible the > > proposed syntax is. > > Consider the following expression: > > $test?FOO:BAR:BARBARA > > > > Would this mean that the person meant $test?(FOO):(BAR:BARBARA) or > > $test?(FOO:BAR):BARBARA? > >Okay, is there another character we can use? Doesn't look that way. >Maybe we need to use two characters then? Since both "::" and "->" >are taken, "//" is the best suggestion I can come up with. > > - Stig > >-- > Stig Sæther Bakken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Fast Search & Transfer ASA, Trondheim, Norway -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
