Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52178 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 1299 invoked from network); 9 May 2011 18:40:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 May 2011 18:40:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=tyra3l@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=tyra3l@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.42 mail-ew0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.215.42] ([209.85.215.42:32872] helo=mail-ew0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 71/01-20726-21538CD4 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 14:40:24 -0400 Received: by ewy2 with SMTP id 2so1635993ewy.29 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:40:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pABEkYoep6St8O+svz3quQSF+3r1dWG+d826ca2Fatc=; b=UcKwmytJG0zZ0hivHDNn8g7rcpyWsmANdOTA/UazanU/EStGY5MJsSM/G1+x5LP/7g PW4yqbxcqMUOvQFwhfM64763g95WsVgD9LH126BfXIWX/PJVHv50KuX7IJy4b1/+eJ44 y1kcRWH8bgGKQEOEMr0TMvCZM0eBSC+0pc3No= 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=o13VF+XGERHfNUXWcx6eciRg6eAsOuZ/nXoSxTDJTodmEkeZWJD2tSv8pt2e1fmHm6 MUgP5OwaE7PX3ZFjrzFevUDVE9/jZAuPo6Q0GupBkBcfGh0HXuNuTsARnsNIefuNzjKm ziGq9NAU2skXPeNm0Qn/K9NkG4biI7Ap93XdY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.15.15 with SMTP id e15mr757085eee.231.1304966409214; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:40:09 -0700 (PDT) Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com Received: by 10.14.127.79 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 11:40:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DC83401.2090202@sugarcrm.com> References: <4DC826B1.4090806@lerdorf.com> <4DC82A36.8090604@lerdorf.com> <4DC83401.2090202@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 20:40:09 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5aIi3on9H4o1Ht2MLRpfFIQbBMQ Message-ID: To: Stas Malyshev Cc: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" , PHP Internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65a0f9843da2304a2dc2bf0 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] annotations again From: info@tyrael.hu (Ferenc Kovacs) --0016e65a0f9843da2304a2dc2bf0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 8:35 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > If possible, could you look at the patch and give me high level ideas >> of what could be changed? >> > > If the patch is the same RFC that is at > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations, the same problems that were voiced a > number of times on the list stay: > > - it is overly complex (see class User example - it's really a piece of > code, I think it should be in the code) > - it introduces method call syntax not compatible with the rest of PHP > - it introduces object instantiation syntax not compatible with the rest of > PHP > > These issues were mentioned before - were they fixed? > The RFC also does not clarify where the code contained in annotations is > run and how it would play with bytecode caches. > please read the other thread, I brought up the original thread (the more php friendly version), as it was mentioned, the rfc didn't up to date AFAIK. Tyrael --0016e65a0f9843da2304a2dc2bf0--