Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50212 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 21247 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2010 23:55:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Nov 2010 23:55:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=will.fitch@quepasacorp.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=will.fitch@quepasacorp.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain quepasacorp.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: will.fitch@quepasacorp.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.42 mail-ew0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.215.42] ([209.85.215.42:35113] helo=mail-ew0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B7/44-25603-358C1EC4 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:55:00 -0500 Received: by ewy1 with SMTP id 1so28497ewy.29 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:54:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.10.193 with SMTP id q1mr2820526ebq.81.1289865294281; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:54:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.112.130 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:54:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C59B588@il-ex2.zend.net> <887FE7CFF6F8DE4BB3A9535F53AFD06A2C59B6A0@il-ex2.zend.net> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 17:54:54 -0600 Message-ID: To: Pierre Joye Cc: Zeev Suraski , "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c121cac7dcd0495202a82 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) support discussion From: will.fitch@quepasacorp.com (Will Fitch) --0015174c121cac7dcd0495202a82 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I have certainly wanted them many times - especially when using SOAP. Having WSDL auto-generation without compromising developer documentation and attempting to have user-land code parse phpdoc for this purpose seem{ed,s} counterintuitive. That said, introducing annotations is a HUGE undertaking and would require a ton of work with potentially little return. I do think it would be worth looking into in a future major release, but there are quite a few other things that would be more beneficial to the community for immediate discussions. Did anyone write and RFC on this? guilhermeblanco has a good start. On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > Suggesting phpdoc is used for the purposes mentioned does not mean we > don't understand what we're talking about. > > I feel like you never used annotations in other languages, did you? > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Thanks, Will Fitch Director of Operations | Quepasa.com 931.205.8242 | will.fitch@quepasacorp.com Twitter: twitter.com/willfitch --0015174c121cac7dcd0495202a82--