On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:40 PM Larry Garfield
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2025, at 3:28 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> > On 02/06/2025 17:57, Larry Garfield wrote:
> >> Well, now you're talking about something with a totally separate
> compile step, which is not what Michael seemed to be describ
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025, at 3:28 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 02/06/2025 17:57, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> Well, now you're talking about something with a totally separate compile
>> step, which is not what Michael seemed to be describing at all. But it
>> seems like that would be necessary.
On 3 June 2025 03:38:58 BST, Larry Garfield wrote:
>I fundamentally do not believe pulling arbitrary files into such a structure
>is wise, possible, or will achieve anything resembling the desired result,
>because *basically no application or library is single-file anymore*.
I don't think a
On 02/06/2025 17:57, Larry Garfield wrote:
Well, now you're talking about something with a totally separate compile step,
which is not what Michael seemed to be describing at all. But it seems like
that would be necessary.
There's definitely some crossed wires somewhere. I deliberately left
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025, at 9:44 AM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 2 June 2025 14:27:45 BST, Larry Garfield wrote:
>>Were we to do that, then the consumer container-loading needs to take any
>>potential module-definition into account. Eg, if one class from a module is
>>pulled into a container,
On 2 June 2025 14:27:45 BST, Larry Garfield wrote:
>Were we to do that, then the consumer container-loading needs to take any
>potential module-definition into account. Eg, if one class from a module is
>pulled into a container, all of them must be.
You wouldn't containerize "something from
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025, at 5:01 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 01/06/2025 17:05, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> I think there's a key assumption here still that is at the root of much of
>> the disagreement in this thread.
>>
>> Given that code from multiple files is clustered together into a "thing
On 01/06/2025 17:05, Larry Garfield wrote:
I think there's a key assumption here still that is at the root of much of the
disagreement in this thread.
Given that code from multiple files is clustered together into a "thing"
and Given we can use that "thing" to define a boundary for:
* name reso
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 3:18 AM Rob Landers wrote:
> This could work! I have a couple of critiques, but they aren’t negative:
>
> I think I like it. It might be worth pointing out that JavaScript "hoists"
> the imports to file-level during compilation — even if you have the import
> statement buri
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025, at 12:26 AM, Michael Morris wrote:
> $myModule = require_module('file/path');
>
> or perhaps
>
> const myModule = require_module('file/path');
>
> The module probably should return a static class or class instance, but
> it could return a closure. In JavaScript the dynamic
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025, at 09:17, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2025, at 07:26, Michael Morris wrote:
>> Ok, the conversation is getting sidetracked, but I think some progress is
>> being made.
>>
>> I started this latest iteration last year with a thread about introducing
>> somethin
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025, at 07:26, Michael Morris wrote:
> Ok, the conversation is getting sidetracked, but I think some progress is
> being made.
>
> I started this latest iteration last year with a thread about introducing
> something similar to the ES module system of JavaScript to PHP. What at
Ok, the conversation is getting sidetracked, but I think some progress is
being made.
I started this latest iteration last year with a thread about introducing
something similar to the ES module system of JavaScript to PHP. What
attracts me to this particular model is that it should already be fam
On 30 May 2025, at 21:29, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2025 19:21:08 BST, Alwin Garside wrote:
>> In the example above, I image calling or extending the `Foo::bar()` method
>> from somewhere outside the `Acme` namespace would trigger an E_USER_WARNING
>> or E_USER_NOTICE. The war
On 30 May 2025 19:21:08 BST, Alwin Garside wrote:
>In the example above, I image calling or extending the `Foo::bar()` method
>from somewhere outside the `Acme` namespace would trigger an E_USER_WARNING or
>E_USER_NOTICE. The warning/notice could then be suppressed when explicitly
>overridin
On 30 May 2025, at 18:38, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2025 08:57:34 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
>>
>> I’m starting to think that maybe modules might be a bad idea; or at least,
>> class/module visibility.
>>
>> As an anecdote, I was looking to extract a protobuf encoding library fr
On 30 May 2025 08:57:34 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>I’m starting to think that maybe modules might be a bad idea; or at least,
>class/module visibility.
>
>As an anecdote, I was looking to extract a protobuf encoding library from a
>larger codebase and create a separate library for Larry’s Ser
On Mon, May 26, 2025, at 21:39, Alwin Garside wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> It took me a while, but I'm finally caught up with this thread, and would
> like to give my 2 cents.
>
> On 25 May 2025, at 23:17, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> >
> > On 25/05/2025 21:28, Larry Garfield wrote:
> >> Even if
Hey all,
It took me a while, but I'm finally caught up with this thread, and would like
to give my 2 cents.
On 25 May 2025, at 23:17, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
> On 25/05/2025 21:28, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> Even if we develop some way such that in Foo.php, loading the class
>> \Beep\Boo
On 25/05/2025 21:28, Larry Garfield wrote:
Even if we develop some way such that in Foo.php, loading the class
\Beep\Boop\Narf pulls from /beep/boop/v1/Narf.php and loading it from Bar.php
pulls the same class from /beep/boop/v2/Narf.php, and does something or other
to keep the symbols separat
On 25/05/2025 09:27, Rob Landers wrote:
Here are my thoughts, but first some vocabulary:
- direct dependency: a package that is used by the current package
- exported dependency: a direct dependency that can be used outside
the current package
- peer dependency: an indirect dependency on another
On Sat, May 24, 2025, at 4:18 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>>I assume that it will be up to a dependency resolver (either composer or
>>something else) will need to figure out which direct dependencies to "hoist"
>>up and provide a compatible version between the two packages.
>
> I see this
On Sat, May 24, 2025, at 23:18, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 24 May 2025 14:11:57 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
> >My only concern is how this would be handled in the class tables. Right now,
> >\AlicesCalendar\Monolog\Logger and \BobsDocs\Monolog\Logger would be
> >considered entirely different
On 24 May 2025 14:11:57 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
>My only concern is how this would be handled in the class tables. Right now,
>\AlicesCalendar\Monolog\Logger and \BobsDocs\Monolog\Logger would be
>considered entirely different types -- as in, not compatible. So if
>AlicesCalendar returns a type
On Sat, May 24, 2025, at 11:34, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I'm going to skip over all the details about the autoloader for now, because
> I think they're going deep into implementation details, and I want to focus
> on the same top-level design as my previous email.
>
Hi Michael,
I'm going to skip over all the details about the autoloader for now, because I
think they're going deep into implementation details, and I want to focus on
the same top-level design as my previous email.
On 23 May 2025 02:27:41 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
>Bobs docs needs an old
On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 4:29 PM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
> On 22/05/2025 12:09, Michael Morris wrote:
>
>
>> I've tried several times to explain why I think Linux containers are a
>> good analogy; I'm not sure if you didn't understand, or just didn't agree,
>> so I don't know what else I can
On 22/05/2025 12:09, Michael Morris wrote:
I've tried several times to explain why I think Linux containers
are a good analogy; I'm not sure if you didn't understand, or just
didn't agree, so I don't know what else I can say.
I have no disagreement with that, but it's an implement
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 8:27 AM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
>
> So if we can come up with a solution where only the WordPress plugins need
> to be changed, and you can use whatever dependencies you want without
> waiting for them to be changed to a new way of working, is that not a good
> thing?
On Tue, May 13, 2025, 9:32 a.m. Deleu wrote:
> Hi!
>
> It's been a few days since I wanted to send this email to internals, but
> real life has been a bit chaotic so I apologize if it comes off as if I
> didn't research the archives enough. I glossed over the Module conversation
> from 10 months
On 21 May 2025 13:26:27 BST, "Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]"
wrote:
>
>My understanding of the example is that there are two WordPress plugins, which
>want independent sets of Composer dependencies. There might be 20 different
>Composer packages used by each plugin, but those packages don't need any
On 21 May 2025 10:20:19 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
>I'll stop you there. You are deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote and
>even a cursory glance at it makes that clear. You are not trying to be
>constructive in any way, you're trolling.
I'm sorry you got that impression. I can assure you
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 7:23 AM Deleu wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 11:08 AM Michael Morris
> wrote:
>
>> The Problem: Interoperability.
>>
>> That's really it.
>>
>
> I think this is why Rowan keeps telling you to call or compare this with
> "Containers" and not modules.
>
Which is why
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 11:08 AM Michael Morris wrote:
> The Problem: Interoperability.
>
> That's really it.
>
I think this is why Rowan keeps telling you to call or compare this with
"Containers" and not modules. When I opened this thread, my interest was in
bundling multiple files all at once
On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 6:18 PM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
>
>
> On 20 May 2025 15:04:49 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
> >The Problem: Interoperability.
> >
> >That's really it. Scenario
> >Alice provides whatchamacallit A that depends on other whatchamacallit D
> to
> >work.
> >Bob provides wha
On 20 May 2025 15:04:49 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
>The Problem: Interoperability.
>
>That's really it. Scenario
>Alice provides whatchamacallit A that depends on other whatchamacallit D to
>work.
>Bob provides whatchamacallit B that also depends on D.
>Charles is using A and B.
>D gets update
The Problem: Interoperability.
That's really it. Scenario
Alice provides whatchamacallit A that depends on other whatchamacallit D to
work.
Bob provides whatchamacallit B that also depends on D.
Charles is using A and B.
D gets updated with a new incompatible API to its prior version.
Alice publi
On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 10:35, Rob Landers wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 10:11, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14 May 2025 22:27:32 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
>> >
>> >As written, that simply isn't possible in PHP because there is only one
>> >class allowed with a given name. Name
On Thu, May 15, 2025, at 10:11, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
>
> On 14 May 2025 22:27:32 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
> >
> >As written, that simply isn't possible in PHP because there is only one
> >class allowed with a given name. Names of classes are global. I don't think
> >this has to be the
On 14 May 2025 22:27:32 BST, Rob Landers wrote:
>
>As written, that simply isn't possible in PHP because there is only one class
>allowed with a given name. Names of classes are global. I don't think this has
>to be the case, though. Different languages take different approaches to this.
>Fo
On 14 May 2025 21:50:25 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
>Container, module, block, package, plugin, domain, division, fraction,
>lump, branch, sliver, splinter, constituent or whatever the hell else you
>call it, I don't care.
I know you think I'm just being pedantic about names, but
what I was tr
On Wed, May 14, 2025, at 16:57, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>
>
> On 14 May 2025 14:24:57 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
> >Well, it's what Go calls "modules". It's confusing because I was being
> >truthful, not snarky, when I said "Ask 10 programmers for the definition of
> >module and expect 12
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 10:57 AM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
>
> I don't know much about Go, but at a glance it uses a similar model to
> JavaScript and Python where *classes don't have a universal name*, the
> names are always local. That's not a different kind of module, it's a
> fundamentally
On 14 May 2025 14:24:57 BST, Michael Morris wrote:
>Well, it's what Go calls "modules". It's confusing because I was being
>truthful, not snarky, when I said "Ask 10 programmers for the definition of
>module and expect 12 answers." I'm self trained, so I expect to get my
>terms wrong from time
On Wed, May 14, 2025, at 15:24, Michael Morris wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 4:08 AM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
> wrote:
>> __
>>
>> What Michael Morris is talking about is really a completely different
>> concept - it's more like "containers", in the sense of Docker, Kubernetes,
>> etc, w
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 4:08 AM Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]
wrote:
>
> What Michael Morris is talking about is really a completely different
> concept - it's more like "containers", in the sense of Docker, Kubernetes,
> etc, where different sections of code can be isolated, and declare classes
> with c
On Tue, 13 May 2025, at 16:30, Deleu wrote:
> If we consider how GitHub, Composer and Docker Hub works, we can pin a very
> important aspect of "namespaces": {entity}/{project}. Entity may either be an
> individual or an organization, but the concept is mostly the same. Although
> it can be argu
On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 11:31 AM Deleu wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This would allow public, private and protected classes in a way that I
> believe to be useful for the large ecosystem that surrounds Composer. From
> my extremely limited understanding of the engine, I think the easy/natural
> step would be
On Tue, May 13, 2025, 18:35 Deleu wrote:
> Hi!
>
> It's been a few days since I wanted to send this email to internals, but
> real life has been a bit chaotic so I apologize if it comes off as if I
> didn't research the archives enough. I glossed over the Module conversation
> from 10 months ago
Hi!
It's been a few days since I wanted to send this email to internals, but
real life has been a bit chaotic so I apologize if it comes off as if I
didn't research the archives enough. I glossed over the Module conversation
from 10 months ago and the one that recently surfaced and after deeply
th
50 matches
Mail list logo
