On 31.03.2009, at 08:51, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 04:47, Greg Beaver
wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
So where are we at here?
If nobody proposes something, this will just slide by ..
I propose reserving PHP. extensions can be PHP\extname (i.e. class
PHP\Phar, or f
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 04:47, Greg Beaver wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>>
>> So where are we at here?
>> If nobody proposes something, this will just slide by ..
>
> I propose reserving PHP. extensions can be PHP\extname (i.e. class
> PHP\Phar, or for extensions with multiple levels of hier
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 13.03.2009, at 00:39, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
>
>> Christian Schneider wrote:
>>> Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally keywords, now
>>> namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I think it
>>> is crucial to have a clear nami
IMHO any extension name should be reserved as a namespace.
Ilia Alshanetsky
On 30-Mar-09, at 7:56 PM, Paul Biggar wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith > wrote:
If nobody proposes something, this will just slide by ..
It seems simple enough to add a note on the manual
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> If nobody proposes something, this will just slide by ..
It seems simple enough to add a note on the manual page reserving the
use of some namespaces:
PHP (even if we never use it, best no-one else does)
internals (ditto)
SPL (reserved
On 13.03.2009, at 00:39, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Christian Schneider wrote:
Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally
keywords, now
namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I
think it
is crucial to have a clear naming guide now.
And these guidelines have
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 13.03.2009, at 00:39, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
>
>> Christian Schneider wrote:
>>> Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally keywords, now
>>> namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I think it
>>> is crucial to have a clear nami
On 13.03.2009, at 00:39, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Christian Schneider wrote:
Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally
keywords, now
namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I
think it
is crucial to have a clear naming guide now.
And these guidelines have
Christian Schneider wrote:
Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally keywords, now
namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I think it
is crucial to have a clear naming guide now.
And these guidelines have to be noticed by everybody who starts to use
namespac
Alain Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:06:01PM +0100, Christian Schneider wrote:
>> Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally keywords, now
>> namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I think it
>> is crucial to have a clear naming guide now.
>
> +1
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:06:01PM +0100, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Things gettings reserved at a later stage (like originally keywords, now
> namespaces) can lead to a big deal of frustration. Therefore I think it
> is crucial to have a clear naming guide now.
+1
> And these guidelines have t
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> On 24.01.2009, at 00:49, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
>
>> Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>> I don't think we have to treat our users like a total fcking idiots.
>>> If anyone thinks using "SPL" or "PHP" as their root namespace is a
>>> good idea they deserve to be kicked in the nut
IMHO, the prefix will turn everything more readable...
I already saw people experiencing some doubts regarding this piece of
code. I had to illustrate it everything.
namespace Foo;
class Bar
{
public function test()
{
try {
do_some_stuf();
} catch (Exception $
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 03:58:22PM -0800, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> >I think the decision was to not yet bother with reserving namespaces or
> >starting to namespace-ify extensions. We might however want to put out a
> >naming guide for namespaces.
>
> I agree. Whether
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
I think the decision was to not yet bother with reserving namespaces or
starting to namespace-ify extensions. We might however want to put out a
naming guide for namespaces.
I agree. Whether the error is raised or not on reserved namespaces can be done later, but
we s
On 24.01.2009, at 00:49, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
I don't think we have to treat our users like a total fcking idiots.
If anyone thinks using "SPL" or "PHP" as their root namespace is a
good idea they deserve to be kicked in the nuts.
And who's going to administer this
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
I don't think we have to treat our users like a total fcking idiots.
If anyone thinks using "SPL" or "PHP" as their root namespace is a
good idea they deserve to be kicked in the nuts.
And who's going to administer this kicking?
-Andrei
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime D
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 23:14, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> Forgive me if I've missed this in the heat of all the namespaces
> discussions. Did we consider having reserved namespaces, like 'PHP' or
> 'SPL', so that if a user tries to declare a namespace with that name an
> error is raised?
I don't th
> Forgive me if I've missed this in the heat of all the namespaces
> discussions. Did we consider having reserved namespaces, like 'PHP' or
> 'SPL', so that if a user tries to declare a namespace with that name an
> error is raised?
I'd say what you are looking for is probably this.
http://wiki.ph
19 matches
Mail list logo
