Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49595 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5842 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2010 23:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Sep 2010 23:05:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierrick@webstart.fr; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierrick@webstart.fr; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain webstart.fr from 209.85.214.42 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierrick@webstart.fr X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.42 mail-bw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.42] ([209.85.214.42:61927] helo=mail-bw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id AD/11-17717-9A9BA8C4 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:05:14 -0400 Received: by bwz7 with SMTP id 7so3020951bwz.29 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.56.14 with SMTP id w14mr969474bkg.187.1284159910561; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT) Sender: pierrick@webstart.fr Received: by 10.204.46.207 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C887D2B.2000605@zend.com> References: <4C873C0F.1010200@zend.com> <4C879613.7090709@zend.com> <4C887D2B.2000605@zend.com> Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:05:10 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nwccXEKV2yLL7Q_RTZwPpi_x5qA Message-ID: To: Dmitry Stogov Cc: Guilherme Blanco , guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com, Zeev Suraski , PHP Internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch From: pierrick@php.net (Pierrick Charron) > > [Validation(Email(checkMX=>true))] looks better. > > Thanks. Dmitry. > Hi Dmitry The initial syntax proposed in the RFC/Patch is inspired by C#. If you modify this syntax to remove brackets in nested annotations you will have some conflicts like this one : [Validation(Email)] In this case the parser can't determine if Email is a constant or a nested annotation. I did a second patch with an other syntax (proposed by Etienne in the initial thread) which look like this : %Validation(%Email) I personally prefer the first one because I like the fact that you have a start and an end delimiter for each annotations but I can live with an other one if the majority is more comfortable with it. Regards, Pierrick