Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50265
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.42 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        b=AEAor1CuOyJIB2R8tqtfsZRt5lBD1i+rckf+RiVYwZkybjp16gx+ndB6J5LAOykUSF
         NrQHpVC5T2mNLw2WVA4CSsaCvGC5Bd3lIeyWl1Ch5OFPyv1OMN5UY2E2sp6YDOq9DZ28
         Wjkl3y7VbJ0As6IiQTJng0Sf0gYS5rgZXrAJ8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=g+2hPCTaK1qYigYqOEVyC5saprkzZqFrfnAG6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTik703Bky+ZtjdzBMY8tr97m34jDSSMyoB9opJKR@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTik_mUdq1A2oWvqxrnKnDGgoR5An47tPmK5hHXZE@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CE28F49.9000700@toolpark.com>
	<AANLkTimEQnmxViQxqUXZjs6f_ub6YgrRuiHxtJG65i-4@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimUVcQCJm+mQV5aX0tjc9RP7xiqBTFuOw14DJpP@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=g+2hPCTaK1qYigYqOEVyC5saprkzZqFrfnAG6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 20:27:46 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTin7yLSkiweTMXJhMTFR=8r7GS2BbLtYYvsr2qKR@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chad Fulton <chadfulton@gmail.com>
Cc: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com>, Lars Schultz <lars.schultz@toolpark.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630f5fb392fd00495308d93
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) support discussion
From: info@tyrael.hu (Ferenc Kovacs)

--00163630f5fb392fd00495308d93
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Chad Fulton <chadfulton@gmail.com> wrote:

> I understand where you're coming from, and I appreciate the effort
> you've put into this RFC so far, but what I meant is that (although I
> don't have karma and won't be voting), *if* I were to vote, I would
> only +1 annotations if they were extremely limited (key=>value pairs).
>

if that what you want, you should vote +1 for the annotations, or open a new
vote for extending the reflection api to allow getting invidual docblock
tags, or just write a wrapper for the ReflectionProperty::getDocComment.


> That's why implementation matters to me - I see the benefit of simple
> meta-data retrieval but not an extensive syntax addition to the
> language.
>

thats a question about the implementation. vote for that in the next round.


>
> I also think that's why you see people suggesting docblock, because
> what it already offers is similar to this key=>value metadata
> retrieval using the @tag syntax.


currently there is very little support for the docblock in the php core
itself, as I mentioned you can only get a whole block through reflection,
and I don't really know, how that got into the language. :)


> Really, people are saying they favor
> some meta-data retrieval but not the complicated annotations that you
> want.
>

so it seems, that some kind of metadata storing, retrival mechanism is
wanted, thats good to hear.

Tyrael

--00163630f5fb392fd00495308d93--