Whoa.  Once again I'm on that train of thought that eliminates the
difference between classes and namespaces.  +1 from me.

 - Stig

[Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> :: 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]

-- 
  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]

Reply via email to