[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-daboo-sieve-include-03.txt (fwd)

2005-08-25 09:03:00

It would only be a no-op if the default namespace is the global namespace
;-) Unless you guys are already deeply along the path of a single
namespace, I believe a per-file namespace is less likely to cause
confusing results.

FWIW I totally agree.  I wonder if even though the variables spec puts it that 
way, it would be ok to interpret "Global" as "File scope" and add text to the 
include draft to permit this.  Indeed it's only with the include extension that 
the possibility of anything wider than File Scope exists.  I'm also a PHP user 
and I also think they've done a pretty good job with their :global specifer.

A :local modifier would do the trick. The text in the drafts should be
more explicit about there being a single global namespace for all scripts.

I think a :local modifier is a bit of a waste... you'd likely only use it AFTER 
you'd spent ages debugging an awkward problem.  I'd much rather we helped them 
avoid the awkward problem in the first place and hence my support for a 
:superglobal type modifier.