Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108909
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
In-Reply-To: <CAEPJdunSr8PkBtSLO8g_JMLzM4cFVnXsQSEMFmu2RN25XT=grw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 23:18:46 +0700
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <7BAB0436-03EC-4183-BA5A-5A165DAE806E@koalephant.com>
References: <CAEPJdunSr8PkBtSLO8g_JMLzM4cFVnXsQSEMFmu2RN25XT=grw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Attributes v2
From: php-lists@koalephant.com (Stephen Reay)



> On 9 Mar 2020, at 21:42, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de> wrote:
>=20
> Hi all,
>=20
> I want to resurrect Dmitrys Attributes RFC that was rejected for 7.1 =
in
> 2016 with a few changes, incorporating feedback from the mailing list =
back
> then and from talking to previous no voters.
>=20
> The RFC is at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2
>=20
> A working patch is at https://github.com/beberlei/php-src/pull/2 =
though
> work around the details is still necessary.
>=20
> The RFC contains a section with common criticism and objections to
> attributes, and I hope to have collected and responded to a good =
amount
> already from previous discussions.
>=20
> There is also a fair amount of implementation detail still up for =
debate,
> which is noted in "Open Issues". I have pre-committed to one approach, =
but
> listed alternatives there. On these issues I am looking for your =
feedback.
>=20
> greetings
> Benjamin

Hi Benjamin,

I can=E2=80=99t comment on the feasibility of this RFC or the patch, but =
I like the approach it takes to this =E2=80=98problem=E2=80=99. I can =
already imagine a number of =E2=80=98nicer=E2=80=99 ways to achieve =
similar/same results using this, so thanks for taking up the baton!

My one small query/request is about the `Reflection*::getAttributes` =
method. Is there a philosophical and/or technological reason for why it =
can only =E2=80=98filter=E2=80=99 the attributes by a single given name, =
rather than being variadic and filtering against multiple names (i.e. =
returning those that match any of the given names)? I would imagine many =
uses (particularly within libraries) would end up wanting to retrieve =
multiple attribute types they=E2=80=99re aware of all at once, no?


Cheers


Stephen=20=