>  I'm still trying to figure out why you think this is an acceptable
>  implementation of namespaces. This isn't namespaces at all. This is
>  barely an acceptable method of shortening classnames. What are we, as

It's what was attempted to do. If you find it "unacceptable", one would 
expect some argument as of why and what do you propsoe to do instead.

>  developers, supposed to do on a namespace that has a particularly large
>  number of available classes? Import them all individually? So, I now

No. They are not expected to import class names in global namespace. 
That's exactly why we got these overlong names in the first place - 
because we got everything in global space. Why we'd fall into the same 
trap again?

>  need to go from having a file that includes necessary libraries to a
>  file that needs to import them all? That's REAL intelligent design,
>  right there.

And you proposal is? Where I can see the implementation and description 
of it?
-- 
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
stas@[...].com   http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829   MSN: stas@[...].com

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php