Well the difference is that C++ can figure out what to do at compile-time. I don't think we can which means that it would put more logic into run-time which is a bad thing IMO (especially for something new like this). Or can you think of a way to differ between these at compile-time? Andi
At 09:56 PM 9/30/2001 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote: >:: 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]
