Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50281 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 7315 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2010 02:39:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Nov 2010 02:39:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=guilhermeblanco@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=guilhermeblanco@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.42 mail-bw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.42] ([209.85.214.42:42274] helo=mail-bw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 02/42-25421-36043EC4 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:39:31 -0500 Received: by bwz13 with SMTP id 13so1037904bwz.29 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:39:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1assUFDoWfWNOWVdJr2YJWWZwK3AUncgQLz7DqiB6wg=; b=joFfNRj85jD38MHEMi9K0W7/lrpJ0umTjFxm8kqfCu+H5DOYQI5LakwO0my3OaGi95 7sSetcdQm11TKqqUp+C0yE5kXPQIqgNUb9car37mtd3LAoNoAL2lkTcNMZrjfoiTrB2r vUngtFO7vGdjq85nncX385NWd56ZhfIXXfQkQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=lPg6odDENfxgkZ7Zb1YEddz/Qt3mLVgj09Kzvd/8Yt25DGt14aV1p9Hd45LUpxr4TZ MT3xtZnw291JYumYv3r4N7lkh8kvMuDTZ5UaBLiW4V3OK46b3srAOuwW59eLFEwcCqz2 1h9EvgYIrOJhPGpRmcjG7uUeBHF50KYAbt+KA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.78.139 with SMTP id l11mr6567935fak.31.1289961566520; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:39:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.105.5 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:39:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4CE33F06.3080507@gmail.com> References: <4CE3340F.6090304@sugarcrm.com> <87.0F.25421.F4933EC4@pb1.pair.com> <4CE339DF.1020605@sugarcrm.com> <4CE33D54.8000009@sugarcrm.com> <4CE33F06.3080507@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 00:39:26 -0200 Message-ID: To: Alec Gorge Cc: Stas Malyshev , "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) supportdiscussion From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com") Hi Alec, Here is the quick list: - Where to put the metadata information? docblock or though php code? - Syntax (based on first decision) - Return would be an array or object instances - Compile time or run time (decision is more about APC being able to cache, but instances being created at runtime automatically or no APC cache but instances only being created when requested (during Reflection call) - Named variables for instantiation or method arguments order? How would we deal with the need of Reflector during constructor if second sounds better? - Would we support inherited metadata? Cheers, On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:33 AM, Alec Gorge wrote: > In my opinion (as a person with 0 karma), I think that sounds reasonable > because most people are most concerned about the actual implementation > (syntax, performance, apc etc) because I don't think many argue that > Metadata doesn't have value. > > What are the 5 different discussion topics you are thinking of, just out = of > curiosity? > > Also, I can just post my syntax idea as a gist or pastie or something > instead of making an rfc... > > -Alec > > On 11/16/2010 9:29 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Hi Stas, >> >> Ok, so you think I should just consider everyone want some sort of >> meta attribute support and start discussing the topics? >> Should I separate it in different threads or put it all here? >> >> The subject is big and I identify at least 5 different discussions >> that can diverge. >> >> Cheers, >> >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Stas Malyshev >> =C2=A0wrote: >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>>> I'm able to write 10 RFC's, but none will care until we reach this >>>> list with a patch. >>> >>> Not entirely true. Patch helps, but with feature this big and complex >>> having >>> consensus on design before actually implementing it may be better and >>> save >>> you some time. >>> As for polls, I think generic "having annotations" poll is not very >>> useful. >>> It's like having a poll "should we have cool features in PHP?" Of cours= e >>> we >>> should! The devil is in the details. And so far the details of this thi= ng >>> contain a significant number of devils we have to handle. >>> -- >>> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect >>> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ >>> (408)454-6900 ext. 227 >>> >> >> > --=20 Guilherme Blanco Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480 MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil