Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49652
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.153 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4C8FD72B.1070108@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:12:27 -0700
Organization: SugarCRM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pierrick Charron <pierrick@webstart.fr>
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>
References: <39505F13-655A-43AF-941E-77750B7F7201@gmail.com>	<001601cb543a$d81ebac0$885c3040$@com>	<AANLkTikxw_xHn2fosykSwTat_qsGA16KriFinqc8Btrq@mail.gmail.com>	<4C8FC695.2060800@sugarcrm.com> <AANLkTimOaicMidzH8oYWcieaCyx2bLefPGkXGQDZPQ6Y@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimOaicMidzH8oYWcieaCyx2bLefPGkXGQDZPQ6Y@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch
From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev)

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.

Of course, writing an RFC and a patch is a good way to start the process 
and I think it is great you did it. However it doesn't mean any 
RFC/patch will be accepted. That's why we discuss it - and there's no 
guarantee that the result would be acceptance. Rodin said he makes 
sculpture by chopping off extra pieces from the block of marble. We need 
to chop off stuff too sometimes if we want the language to stay easy to 
learn, read and use.

> 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.

I think we _already_ have metadata in PHP, albeit done through phpdocs. 
So the question is kind of moot :) We should see if it's enough for us 
or we want to add/change/extend it and if so, how.

I however have some doubts about usefullness of "code" metadata - i.e. 
code being run as part of metadata processing in the language. Having 
purely declarative metadata you can always have user code run on it and 
do any logic you want, but having "active" metadata seems to me to have 
high potential for complications.

Speaking of syntax, I think it is important too, because syntax defines 
readability and usability of the language. And unobvious syntax rules 
for different parts of the language hurts that.
-- 
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227