personally I like ">>" but I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be possible ;)
"Stefan Walk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 29 October 2008 16:23:55 you wrote:
Since this affects everybody, it should be opened up to the community,
so,
the internals should put
On Wednesday 29 October 2008 16:23:55 you wrote:
> Since this affects everybody, it should be opened up to the community, so,
> the internals should put together several options and then open a poll for
> the community to vote on and then use which ever comes out on top.
And the winner is ...
:nev
I really wish that this list was developer-only (which would mean i
couldn't write this post). The developers made a decision. And as much
as I dislike the "feel" of the '\' as namespace separator, the
argumentation for it is really solid - and it's a one character,
distinctive separator. Would you
>
> Since this affects everybody, it should be opened up to the community, so,
> the internals should put together several options and then open a poll for
> the community to vote on and then use which ever comes out on top.
>
> Cheers
> Kelvin
This has been done so many times... I'm following th
Steph
You dismiss the vocal voices far to quickly, claiming its only a minority
against this is very misleading - The majority of Developers are probably
oblivious to this conversation.
The way this argument is heating up and people are being flamed downed,
Namespaces will be known as the "A
marius popa wrote:
yes is true that i like to have strong opinions and yes i could be
wrong in most of them
but when all the comunity screems at the namespace issue i think
core developers should be more diplomatic and offer the good solution not
close the eyes and wash the hands and go forward
Dave Ingram wrote:
> marius popa wrote:
>
>> an semisolution would be an php.ini variable
>> like
>> NAMSPACE_SEPARATOR="::"
>> so if you have an issue with your classes can be reset to "\" or
>> whatever with ini_set
>>
>> i think it's easy to be done if i look at the patch that created the
>>
an semisolution would be an php.ini variable
like
NAMSPACE_SEPARATOR="::"
so if you have an issue with your classes can be reset to "\" or
whatever with ini_set
You're always welcome to change the separator in the PHP source code,
compile that and use your fork as you please. The source code i
Hi Marius,
yes is true that i like to have strong opinions and yes i could be
wrong in most of them
but when all the comunity screems at the namespace issue
"All the community" is not screaming at the namespace issue. "A minority of
the community" is, but most of that minority would scream wh
marius popa wrote:
> an semisolution would be an php.ini variable
> like
> NAMSPACE_SEPARATOR="::"
> so if you have an issue with your classes can be reset to "\" or
> whatever with ini_set
>
> i think it's easy to be done if i look at the patch that created the
> backslash separator issue
>
So
On 28.10.2008, at 13:41, marius popa wrote:
but when all the comunity screems at the namespace issue i think
core developers should be more diplomatic and offer the good
solution not
close the eyes and wash the hands and go forward
its always nice to ask for diplomacy after throwing around
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 13:41:24 marius popa wrote:
> an semisolution would be an php.ini variable
> like
> NAMSPACE_SEPARATOR="::"
> so if you have an issue with your classes can be reset to "\" or
> whatever with ini_set
Please make this list readonly or at least moderated for non-devs (yes,
2008/10/28 marius popa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Marius,
>>
>> Don't know i never saw something so ugly since c++ templates syntax
>> I find it funny that php is designed by committee and no one listen to
>> the community
>>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Marius,
>
> Don't know i never saw something so ugly since c++ templates syntax
> I find it funny that php is designed by committee and no one listen to
> the community
> ===
>
> You have written to this list a few times be
Hi Marius,
Don't know i never saw something so ugly since c++ templates syntax
I find it funny that php is designed by committee and no one listen to
the community
===
You have written to this list a few times before. Here's a brief summary of
your posts:
1) We should be moving to git not svn
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Ólafur Waage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found that he had one valid question that i would like to see answered.
>
>> is the below allowed ?
>>
>> $bar = new Module \ Foo \ Bar();
Don't know i never saw something so ugly since c++ templates syntax
I find it funny
> $class = '\ foo \ bar \ baz';
In those cases i get why its an issue. But when i look at:
namespace\class\method()
against
namespace \ class \ method()
I get the feeling that \ is a pretty good solution.
2008/10/27 Johannes Schlüter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:53 +0100, Han
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:53 +0100, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 16:50, Ólafur Waage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I found that he had one valid question that i would like to see answered.
> >
> >> is the below allowed ?
> >>
> >> $bar = new Module \ Foo \ Bar();
> >>
> >> I fi
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 16:50, Ólafur Waage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found that he had one valid question that i would like to see answered.
>
>> is the below allowed ?
>>
>> $bar = new Module \ Foo \ Bar();
>>
>> I find it easier to read than with out the space.
>
> Since it looks pretty goo
I found that he had one valid question that i would like to see answered.
> is the below allowed ?
>
> $bar = new Module \ Foo \ Bar();
>
> I find it easier to read than with out the space.
Since it looks pretty good with the spaces there.
2008/10/27 Johannes Schlüter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On T
On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 01:43 +1030, Andrew Mason wrote:
> Both Perl and C++ use :: to success. i don't know how much of an
> overlap there is in PHP and Perl or C++ programmers, so I'm not
> suggesting it for familiarity reasons, but i have never heard anyone
> say "i wish C++/ Perl used a different
I think the majority of the namespaces stuff is fine. However, having
read the irc discussion about how the namespaces seperator was decided
upon, i don't think there are many people here who can honestly say
that ease of typing is that big of a deal compared to maintainability
and being able to ea
Hi!
Wasn't it you who said it is all about simple replacement?
In current model, yes. With nesting in hierarchy, it ceases to be so,
that's exactly my point.
However, you always said we shouldn't compare PHP features to other
languages and that for that reason we should not worry about the
Hello Stanislav,
Friday, August 29, 2008, 7:53:02 PM, you wrote:
> Hi!
>> It wasn't designed to have multiple namespaces at all to begin with. But as
> You mean multiple namespaces per file, right? Otherwise it sounds kind
> of silly. Yes, it wasn't designed to have multiple namespaces per fil
Hello Stanislav,
Friday, August 29, 2008, 10:00:08 PM, you wrote:
> Hi!
>> Seems like you are answering lot of questions about namespaces lately
>> with "that's not how the model was designed".
> Not really, and it's not the reason, the reason why it wasn't designed
> that way was explained be
Hi!
Seems like you are answering lot of questions about namespaces lately
with "that's not how the model was designed".
Not really, and it's not the reason, the reason why it wasn't designed
that way was explained before and was explained again.
Guess it should have been designed in the op
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 19:43, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I'm really sorry, but I have to ask.
>> Since you can detect that this is a nested namespace, why can't we allow
>> it?
>
> Because that's not how model was designed and it creates all kind of trouble
> with nam
Hi!
It wasn't designed to have multiple namespaces at all to begin with. But as
You mean multiple namespaces per file, right? Otherwise it sounds kind
of silly. Yes, it wasn't designed to have multiple namespaces per file,
and it's really bad idea to have multiple namespaces per file in 90%
Hello Stanislav,
Thursday, August 28, 2008, 7:43:04 PM, you wrote:
> Hi!
>> I'm really sorry, but I have to ask.
>> Since you can detect that this is a nested namespace, why can't we allow it?
> Because that's not how model was designed and it creates all kind of
It wasn't designed to have mul
Hi!
I'm really sorry, but I have to ask.
Since you can detect that this is a nested namespace, why can't we allow it?
Because that's not how model was designed and it creates all kind of
trouble with name resolution. Basically, you get potentially infinite
resolution path. You don't want to
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 02:57, Felipe Pena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Marcus,
>
> Em Qua, 2008-08-27 às 23:47 +0200, Marcus Boerger escreveu:
>> Hello Hannes,
>>
>> Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 8:32:41 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 18:27, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Marcus,
Em Qua, 2008-08-27 às 23:47 +0200, Marcus Boerger escreveu:
> Hello Hannes,
>
> Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 8:32:41 PM, you wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 18:27, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> - Curly braces support for namespaces (Marcus, not ready for alp
Hello Hannes,
Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 8:32:41 PM, you wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 18:27, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> - Curly braces support for namespaces (Marcus, not ready for alpha2)
> Why not? I thought I saw a patch for this on the list recently (which
> allowed
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 18:27, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - Curly braces support for namespaces (Marcus, not ready for alpha2)
Why not? I thought I saw a patch for this on the list recently (which
allowed both the current namespace foo; and namespace foo {}
syntaxes)..
-Hannes
On 07.08.2008, at 21:22, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
After speaking with several people about their todo items [1],
Johannes and I have settled on the 28th of August for the alpha2
release. We will package on the 27th. Seems like we have a good
chance for getting the open items completed by t
Hi all,
After speaking with several people about their todo items [1],
Johannes and I have settled on the 28th of August for the alpha2
release. We will package on the 27th. Seems like we have a good chance
for getting the open items completed by then.
Note that things that do not make it
36 matches
Mail list logo
