Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49632 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 34270 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2010 17:25:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Sep 2010 17:25:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain nebm.ist.utl.pt from 193.136.128.22 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt X-Host-Fingerprint: 193.136.128.22 smtp2.ist.utl.pt Linux 2.6 Received: from [193.136.128.22] ([193.136.128.22:38061] helo=smtp2.ist.utl.pt) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 40/B8-24501-28E5E8C4 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:25:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0CB4700044D for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:25:18 +0100 (WEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.4 (20090625) (Debian) at ist.utl.pt Received: from smtp2.ist.utl.pt ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.ist.utl.pt [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with LMTP id SvDIrWkAuYty for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:25:18 +0100 (WEST) Received: from mail2.ist.utl.pt (mail2.ist.utl.pt [IPv6:2001:690:2100:1::c]) by smtp2.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95D937000432 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:25:18 +0100 (WEST) Received: from cataphract-old.dulce.lo.geleia.net (a79-168-249-157.cpe.netcabo.pt [79.168.249.157]) (Authenticated sender: ist155741) by mail2.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6302E2003FBE for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:25:18 +0100 (WEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: internals@lists.php.net References: <4C873C0F.1010200@zend.com> <4C879613.7090709@zend.com> <4C887D2B.2000605@zend.com> <4C8AC526.7000505@sugarcrm.com> <4C8B6168.30504@mohiva.com> <4C8BC81E.8000605@sugarcrm.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100913145703.0d226d90@zend.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100913172559.0d2277d0@zend.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100913183427.0d2277d0@zend.com> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:25:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: =?iso-8859-15?Q?N=FAcleo_de_Eng=2E_Biom=E9dica_?= =?iso-8859-15?Q?do_IST?= Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20100913183427.0d2277d0@zend.com> User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.61 (Win32) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch From: glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt ("Gustavo Lopes") On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:46:42 +0100, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > 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. > OK, so let's compare it other concepts: - LSB. Can you explain from the top of your head when when the called scope is reset or not (e.g. with parent::, self::, className::, possibly in non-static contexts) in a function call? I can't. - Namespaces. It takes a while to memorize the resolution rules. - References. Need I say more? You almost need to know the implementation to understand them. Being called "references" doesn't help either. The proposed annotations are basically object instances that are returned when you call getAnnotations. There are no itemized lists of rules. I don't see how this is complex. -- Gustavo Lopes