Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49627
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.185 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20100913183427.0d2277d0@zend.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:46:42 +0200
To: Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt>
Cc: <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <op.vizacsuhidpuyk@cataphract-old.dulce.lo.geleia.net>
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>
 <AANLkTinuD_Aga-CbsbSq-23MTyOLPGrBEswTm=JtBY0H@mail.gmail.com>
 <4C8BC81E.8000605@sugarcrm.com>
 <AANLkTinFSqCFUE3P5XvjJPwUGZqYrQR_9VHAXAWSL=rv@mail.gmail.com>
 <7.0.1.0.2.20100913145703.0d226d90@zend.com>
 <AANLkTi=KCpgNwhq55+f9+60K=y197HTbifaAd7=9qPop@mail.gmail.com>
 <7.0.1.0.2.20100913172559.0d2277d0@zend.com>
 <op.vizacsuhidpuyk@cataphract-old.dulce.lo.geleia.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

At 17:51 13/09/2010, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:28:47 +0100, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
>The fact that PHP is not C# or Java doesn't mean we shouldn't look for
>useful features in those languages,

Right.

>  so it's not an argument.

I think it is very much an argument - the fact a feature is useful in 
another language doesn't mean it also belongs in PHP (even if it's 
useful, see below).

>  What you have
>to say is why you think annotations, while possibly making sense in C# or
>Java (depending on your position on that), do not make sense in PHP.

I'm not and haven't said at any point that annotations aren't 
useful.  They're certainly useful for certain purposes.  They also 
bring about complexity to the language in the form of new language 
concepts that new users have to learn, new syntax, new classes of 
bugs, etc..  When I (as well as many others) say that PHP is not 
Java, it means that our considerations for introducing a feature to 
the language are different, and what's useful in Java - to the point 
that it's worth the added complexity - may not be worth it for 
PHP.  Annotations fall in that category, IMHO.

I think it's safe to assume that (almost) every feature ever added to 
any programming language was useful to some degree.  That in itself 
should make it clear that usefulness is certainly not the only 
criterion for introducing a new feature into a language.  Consistency 
with the language's theme, complexity and compatibility - to name a 
few - all play major roles too.

>I also think you are overestimating the complexity introduced by this
>feature. The patch is not particularly complex. We have doubtfully useful
>features such as LSB which are more complex not only in implementation,
>but also in usage.

I wasn't talking about the patch, I was talking about the need of end 
users to understand yet another new concept and syntax.  PHP used to 
be a language one could pick up over a weekend.  I'm happy it didn't 
stagnate and stay where it was 10 years ago, but considering PHP is 
already a mature language, I think we should be much more picky in 
the features we introduce to the language core.

Zeev