Everything

php

On Namespaces...

php.internals

Manuel Vázquez Acosta

22 years ago

[Is this the right news?]

Recently I downloaded PHP 5.0.0 and read the RFCs, I sadly noticed that a
Namespace proposal was declined. Why? I've been using PHP for many years and
I've found problems when trying to "glue" several third parties codes.

PEAR has come with a not-quite-nice solution to this problem (e.g: class
HTTP_Request), and it works just fine; but I still think namespace would
help a lot.

I know there may be namespaces clashes, but it's far easier to replace just
a line of code - i.e the namespace decl; instead of having to replace each
clashing symbol all over the scripts.

Manu.

Zeev Suraski

22 years ago

Please read the archives!

Zeev

At 18:55 15/08/2004, Manuel Vázquez Acosta wrote:

Justin Hannus

22 years ago

Zeev,

I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and found
allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about its
conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that that
uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use before I
port all my code to php5.

Thanks,
-Justin Hannus


"Zeev Suraski" <zeev@zend.com> wrote in message
news:5.1.0.14.2.20040815190344.04cd6160@localhost...
Please read the archives!

Zeev

At 18:55 15/08/2004, Manuel Vázquez Acosta wrote:

>[Is this the right news?]
>
>Recently I downloaded PHP 5.0.0 and read the RFCs, I sadly noticed that a
>Namespace proposal was declined. Why? I've been using PHP for many years

and

Marcus Börger

22 years ago

Hello Justin,

Monday, August 16, 2004, 4:08:46 PM, you wrote:

> Zeev,

> I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and found
> allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about its
> conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that that
> uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
> dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
> wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use before I
> port all my code to php5.

There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or whatever)
have something like namespaces or packages which require at least the
keyword 'import'. That's an example for the reason i never use names that
are used as keywords in other languages.

regards
marcus

Justin Hannus

22 years ago

Thanks.
I figured as much but when I implemented this the terms 'Namespace' and
'import' just sounded so sexy to me.

-Justin


"Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net> wrote in message
news:441357908.20040816200641@marcus-boerger.de...

> Hello Justin,
>
> Monday, August 16, 2004, 4:08:46 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Zeev,
>
> > I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and

found

> > allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about its
> > conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that

that

> > uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
> > dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
> > wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use before

I

Manuel Vázquez Acosta

22 years ago

> There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or whatever)
> have something like namespaces or packages which require at least the
> keyword 'import'. That's an example for the reason i never use names that
> are used as keywords in other languages.
>

That sounds like good news! Thanks a lot.

BTW, I did spent hours searching the archives for the namespace discussion;
I found a lot of XML namespace stuff and a little bit talking about packages
(Java-like packages).

Regards,
Manu.

Zeev Suraski

22 years ago

At 21:06 16/08/2004, Marcus Boerger wrote:

>Hello Justin,
>
>Monday, August 16, 2004, 4:08:46 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Zeev,
>
> > I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and
> found
> > allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about its
> > conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that that
> > uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
> > dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
> > wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use before I
> > port all my code to php5.
>
>There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or whatever)
>have something like namespaces or packages which require at least the
>keyword 'import'. That's an example for the reason i never use names that
>are used as keywords in other languages.

FWIW, I have no idea what Marcus is talking about :)
The reasons that brought us to remove namespaces in the first place are
conceptual, so I don't see how it could change in the future, but that's
just my 2c :)

Justin - unfortunately you'd have to read quite a few threads on the
mailing list (the engine2 one) in order to understand why namespaces were
removed, because unlike most 'standard' problems, this one is mostly
conceptual, rather than technical.  The short version of the story is that
'import' was perceived as something very different by different people -
and it appeared to only be useful if implemented in a way that completely
contradicts the 'spirit' of PHP (i.e., it's inconsistent with the way
include/require behave, for instance).

A good (albeit long) thread to start with would be
http://www.zend.com/lists/engine2/200304/msg00164.html.

Zeev

Justin Hannus

22 years ago

> I don't see how it could change in the future, but that's
> just my 2c :)

Thanks, thats all I was really looking for. The status of the terms, cause
if they're not being reserved then I would like to continue using them -- at
my own risk. As Marcus points out, its might not be the best idea to
implement function/classes with keyword names from other languages but the
terms best describe my problem. Maybe I'll prefix them.

EOT

-Justin


"Zeev Suraski" <zeev@zend.com> wrote in message
news:5.1.0.14.2.20040817184242.04cd02f0@localhost...

> At 21:06 16/08/2004, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> >Hello Justin,
> >
> >Monday, August 16, 2004, 4:08:46 PM, you wrote:
> >
> > > Zeev,
> >
> > > I too have been searching the archives for subjects on 'namespace' and
> > found
> > > allot of back and forth opinions on it but not a real summary about

its

> > > conclusion. Basically, I have allot of code at work still in php4 that

that

> > > uses it own class importing mechanism than just include|require[_once]
> > > dubbed 'Namespace' with static method Namespace::import(). I'm just
> > > wondering if 'namespace' and 'import' is reserved for future use

before I

> > > port all my code to php5.
> >
> >There's a good chance that later PHP versions (maybe 5.2 or 6 or

whatever)

Al Baker

22 years ago

I would just like to echo some concerns on namespaces.  I've pioneered
the adoption of PHP in some enterprise development groups at Avaya, and
it's been adopted on the merits of the fastest and easiest tool for web
interface development.

Every now and then someone duplicates a class name and mutters about the
apparent weakness in the language.  Though after some explanation, it's
not too big of a deal and just noted as a quirk of the language by
developers.  However, for those not dealing with the language directly
it can leave a lasting impression that PHP is not quite "enterprise
ready."

I know there are ways to be clever with PHP to create excellent and
complex enterprise grade applications.  I also have read and acknowledge
the various issues of ambiguity in syntax and scope that namespaces
introduced.

However, namespaces (and probably an overhaul of include/require
behavior) to be more Java-like would go a long way in further adoption
of PHP in enterprise applications.   I think Andi once called namespaces
programming sugar, well some sugar is good for promoting the language as
well as for tranisitioning developers who have a sugar addiction :)

Regards,
Al

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 12:06 -0400, Justin Hannus wrote: