Better shorter namespace?

[jenstornell]

The old syntax without namespace looks like this:

convertImage('./image.png', './image.webp', 5);

The new syntax will probably look something like this:

\Jens\ImageConverter\convertImage('./image.png', './image.webp', 5);

I don't really like the namespace, but I don't have a better suggestion at the moment.

Another idea

\ImageConverter\convert('./image.png', './image.webp', 5);

It's probably too generic, but I like the look of it better (I also changed the function name). It needs some more thought.

The reason I think it's important to get it right is that it's probably the only line of code most people will use. The rest is "hidden" in the class behind it.

[peter279k]

@jenstornell, thank you for your concern.

I also prefer this \ImageConverter\convert('./image.png', './image.webp', 5); would be great.

[jenstornell]

I added the new namespace and changed the example.php with it.

I was not sure if there was a good reason to keep the class call version. I removed it, but we can re-add it if it make sense.