Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49651
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain webstart.fr from 209.85.214.42 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4C8FC695.2060800@sugarcrm.com>
References: <39505F13-655A-43AF-941E-77750B7F7201@gmail.com>
	<001601cb543a$d81ebac0$885c3040$@com>
	<AANLkTikxw_xHn2fosykSwTat_qsGA16KriFinqc8Btrq@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C8FC695.2060800@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:53:24 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimOaicMidzH8oYWcieaCyx2bLefPGkXGQDZPQ6Y@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, Jonathan Bond-Caron <jbondc@openmv.com>, 
	Nate Abele <nate.abele@gmail.com>, PHP Development <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5a252d5263004903d90c1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch
From: pierrick@webstart.fr (Pierrick Charron)

--001636c5a252d5263004903d90c1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi,

Last year, I attended to a conference where you (Stas) told that the best
way to do a feature request/proposal was by writing a RFC and a patch even
if the patch is not perfect. The current implementation may not be perfect
but it was never said it was a final one. This is a proposal of a first
implementation which is a start to take people's attention and feedback.

So the first question that we have to agree is regardless the syntax, and
the entire implementation do we want to add the ability to add code metadata
(like annotations) or not into PHP. My opinion is yes. If everybody finds
this idea stupid then the discussion stops.

If we agree that Annotations are useful, then I want people who disagree on
the current implementation to say why they disagree regardless of the
current syntax (%Annotation !Annotation [Annotation] or whatever it's IMHO a
detail) and how this implementation could be improved to make it more
relevant for the PHP needs.

I can continue working on this patch if people are interested in the main
idea to improve it (I already plan to improve the patch to include Dmitry's
feedback). But I expect to get constructive feedback on how it could be
improved instead of just a discussion on why this feature is accepted and
others are not (we are not childs), or I don't like the current
implementation without any valid reason but the syntax etc.

Regards,
Pierrick

2010/9/14 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>

> Hi!
>
>
>  There are plenty of use cases for that. The main problem I see is that
>> nobody seems to have actually used them in other languages, and then
>>
>
> Of course not. It couldn't be that your opponents know what they are
> talking about, otherwise they'd agree with you :) Come on. Usefullness of
> annotations in Java (where they are very different, as the language is) or
> C# (which again very different from PHP) or Python (where they again work
> totally different from what is proposed) has nothing to do with
> acceptability of current implementations.
> Is ability to add metadata useful? Of course. But that doesn't mean that
> any proposal implementing metadata automatically gets a pass. We'd be better
> not having it for now than having it wrong - not having can be fixed once a
> good proposal arrives, having it wrong will haunt as forever.
>
> --
> 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
>
>

--001636c5a252d5263004903d90c1--