Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52186
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=bOsFO5NuKEg6PXOcdbV1700eOTOILYCW9IU+f0NEQP7aIAPB+urt5xDW/lANbgD3S9
         Dk1QTMbn8L/+8R+Y+JFIDtEH0AOfcu0zWJ4qgcBdacDv3yK/VX+I1thhwRD9AX8nVPbv
         leWtG80nGbmPKeioFykQN6unUp+oKM0ueCH94=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9013FA90B@US-EX2.zend.net>
References: <4DC729EE.9090600@sugarcrm.com> <4DC75FFF.40008@lerdorf.com>
 <4DC7A7F0.4000504@sugarcrm.com> <BANLkTinn3+MCrSd7BAJCU03FMkuRAeydvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DC8241A.6060100@oracle.com> <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9013FA0B2@US-EX2.zend.net>
 <BANLkTimRFYxxVg+wWPCk-4tFja7HPVtRsg@mail.gmail.com> <8757232E56758B42B2EE4F9D2CA019C9013FA90B@US-EX2.zend.net>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 20:29:52 -0300
Message-ID: <BANLkTimTp_TG4pqb8JmLvCtzgJX54xTyKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>
Cc: Christopher Jones <christopher.jones@oracle.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

Hi Andi,

Sorry, but I mentioned on other thread that RFC is outdated.
I just finished an update to it bringing to recent implementation. The
idea is to get the "big picture" here, I may have left from previous
RFC, but if I did that, please just point out and I can fix.
This implementation is *way* simpler.

Here is the direct link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations

Regards,

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>
>>From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com [mailto:guilhermeblanco@gmail.com]
>
>>Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 10:51 AM
>
>>To: Andi Gutmans
>
>>Cc: Christopher Jones; internals@lists.php.net
>
>>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
>
>>
>
>>Hi Andi,
>
>>
>
>>That's all I want.
>
>>Someone to at least look at the patch and give me feedback.
>
>>None here did that, all you're doing is telling "no, we don't accept it".
>
>>
>
>>Why don't you give me some valuable feedback so I can work on the patch t=
o
>
>>turn it relevant to you?
>
>
>
> I think more important than the patch is the actual functionality. Patch =
can
> always be fixed.
>
> I assume the latest RFC is https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations?
>
>
>
> I will take a bit of a longer look at it in the coming days but from look=
ing
> at it quickly I can see why some people may not be very excited about it.=
 I
> personally have never been a huge fan of meta-data whether in the code or
> outside the code. The biggest scars I carry are from J2EE. I feel
> annotations are sometimes just a nicer way of creating similar problems
> (hard to understand flow, hard to debug, etc=E2=80=A6). I do realize ther=
e are also
> some benefits but as Matthew pointed out the question is are those benefi=
ts
> enough to warrant a whole new grammar in the language or do we keep it
> lighter weight and let people build on that (which with the right caching
> should not be too hard).
>
> Anyway, I will take a longer look.
>
>
>
> Andi (hoping I don=E2=80=99t get extra newlines this time around. My apol=
ogies but
> for some reason my mail client doesn=E2=80=99t like internals@ in the pas=
t two
> weeks).



--=20
Guilherme Blanco
Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil