Use PSR-4 everywhere instead of PSR-0 #11190
Conversation
Tobion
commented
Jun 20, 2014
| Q | A |
|---|---|
| Bug fix? | yes |
| New feature? | no |
| BC breaks? | no |
| Deprecations? | no |
| Tests pass? | yes |
| Fixed tickets | #11189 |
| License | MIT |
| @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ | |||
| "egulias/email-validator": "1.1.0" | |||
| }, | |||
| "autoload": { | |||
| "psr-0": { "Symfony\\": "src/" }, | |||
| "psr-4": { "Symfony\\": "src/Symfony/" }, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure the root composer.json should change to PSR-4. It is valid for the components' and bundles', because it replaces the deprecated composer's target-dir option, but on the root, as there is no such option enabled...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the disadvantage of using PSR-4? I don't thnk we are going to create PEAR-like classes in symfony, do you?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, both of these standards are valid IMO (even though I also prefer the PSR-4). And your change is valid.
But here, on the root, we have a PSR-0 structure (the src is in the src directory, which have a Symfony subdir, which have a Component, Bridge and Bundlesubdirectory, ... etc), when in the bundles / components, we have a PSR-4 structure (the sources are on the same level as the composer.json).
I'm just not sure if there is a gain of performances (it depends if the psr-4 stuff is loaded before or after the psr-0 stuff)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
#11189 (comment)
"the PSR-4 rules are applied before the PSR-0 ones"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
note that the advantage only appears in dev though. In prod, you should dump an optimized autoloader with composer, which will then never reach the PSR-4 or the PSR-0 logic normally but only the classmap
|
👍 - and I sent #11199 that fixes the test suite. Closing this since the other one includes this PR. |