Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49599
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.42 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=mvx18ozJv0b4vsoA2VUNDodyPno2xBldSfI5N2bVTbAkyxGJRvrz/nRTIUTmRbGPFw
         ueQRKWdlIqiYp0VdwHNPWZXzs9ikOkUygKRHbCaZkgcFLI5sqStqkDtRXwNT5g3e1oe4
         OVeXE4+g5NHwIx5IqfYnU8Z1C3ar7Hlbvpn8E=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4C8B6168.30504@mohiva.com>
References: <AANLkTimuWDV=9AA63_9M6cQSp9riCPE214sUNdoV3tQn@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C873C0F.1010200@zend.com>
	<AANLkTimdCnW3ABq5QSnBa78H14e2LPBa=Kt2txU0sTD4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C879613.7090709@zend.com>
	<AANLkTim-dHYyJxX2R3-PBVqqa3sv3+zKYr7zw7QvyngJ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C887D2B.2000605@zend.com>
	<4C8AC526.7000505@sugarcrm.com>
	<AANLkTikpCGj2zVNQmC1gUWaRSpsQD=qNrETi90wj_No7@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C8B6168.30504@mohiva.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 14:46:58 -0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTinuD_Aga-CbsbSq-23MTyOLPGrBEswTm=JtBY0H@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christian Kaps <christian.kaps@mohiva.com>
Cc: Pierrick Charron <pierrick@webstart.fr>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com (Guilherme Blanco)

Hi Stas and Christian,

The separator never was a problem... but I definately don't want to
see another 6 months just to define what would the separator be.
If we need to drop [] in favor of array support, I vote for ! as separator.

!Author("Guilherme Blanco")
!Validation(!Email(checkMX =3D true))


@Stas: Explaining the example of class User {
[Validation([Email(checkMX =3D true)])] public $email; }

class Validation extends \ReflectionAnnotation {}
class Email extends \ReflectionAnnotation {
    protected $checkMX;

    public function getCheckMX() { return $this->checkMX; }
}


$reflClass =3D new \ReflectionClass('User');
$reflProp =3D $reflClass->getProperty('email');

$emailAnnot =3D $reflProp->getAnnotation('Validation')->getValue();
echo $emailAnnot->getCheckMX(); // true


I hope this helps to explain a little bit.


Cheers,

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Christian Kaps
<christian.kaps@mohiva.com> wrote:
> =C2=A0Hi,
>
>>> %Annotation(%Email(checkMX =3D true));
>
> at first I thought what for an ugly syntax. But after a time I think it
> is regardless of whether the % or @(from Java, which I prefer over all,
> if it were possible) syntax is used. It looks very similar. So I prefer
> the % syntax so we can use the [] for defining arrays in annotations. Is
> it possible to define objects from type stdClass in the form
> %Annotation({key: 'value'})?
>
> An other question. Is it necessary to terminate an annotation with a
> semicolon, like in your example?
>
> class Compiler {
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0/**
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * Compile a node into plain PHP.
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 *
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * @param Node $node The node to compile.
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 */
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0%Annotation(%Email(checkMX =3D true))
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0%ResourceParameter(['key' =3D> 'name', 'value' =3D> 'annotat=
ion'])
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0%Inject('\my\name\space\Class')
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0%Test
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0%Annotation({key: 'value'})
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0public function compile(Node $node) {
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0}
> }
>
> Greetings,
> Christian
>
> Am 11.09.2010 02:23, schrieb Pierrick Charron:
>> Hi Stas,
>>
>> Annotations is a new concept in PHP (even if some framework already
>> use an user space implementation of them) and I think it is normal
>> that people will have to read a little bit about this eventually new
>> feature before using it. This is the same thing for traits, if you
>> don't know what is a trait you will not know how to use them. But once
>> you know the concept it's really easy to understand what is an
>> annotation class, parameter etc...
>>
>> Is it really the [] Syntax that you don't like for annotations ? I was
>> personally not against the [] array syntax and I understand that this
>> annotation syntax will make the future implementation of this [] array
>> syntax impossible. So I could change it to the syntax proposed by
>> Etienne in the first thread :
>>
>> %Annotation(%Email(checkMX =3D true));
>>
>> I'm not against any other proposal of syntax so if you have one to
>> proposition do not hesitate.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pierrick
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/9/10 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> [Validation(Email(checkMX=3D>true))] looks better.
>>> Even here it's not clear what is happening. What is "Validation", what =
is
>>> "Email", what is "checkMX" (are they all classes? or only some of them?=
),
>>> what is happening to them (are these classes being instantiated? when? =
what
>>> is passed as parameters? What is the scope of that? etc). Why can we ha=
ve
>>> now two ways to instantiate classes, complete with mix of []s and ()s, =
but
>>> having array syntax using [] is still too complex?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
>>> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
>>> (408)454-6900 ext. 227
>>>
>>> --
>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>



--=20
Guilherme Blanco
Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil