Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52232 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 7273 invoked from network); 10 May 2011 16:47:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 May 2011 16:47:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=guilhermeblanco@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=guilhermeblanco@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.83.42 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: 74.125.83.42 mail-gw0-f42.google.com Received: from [74.125.83.42] ([74.125.83.42:41404] helo=mail-gw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 22/B6-04851-92C69CD4 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 12:47:38 -0400 Received: by gwb17 with SMTP id 17so2697044gwb.29 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 09:47:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yguyARoNz3CmuQP/C7ADOnm2lcyfekH53aLa4/HVSiE=; b=tbxrA3ja5L3Mt+MChbDgGqYRpDAJQmRGZN68MIE3ShCRBadI9r1sA6mcOqPwr0ryXk lvdalV9zYcGZ95Sh/clfx608hq6Nnqly9bfX3M9pr6fv4DvQzy0HZaIyLTwgoqWi2Xm7 Gm6YSeNnQulyIl7kwKpMjUTnnbMqmKBVf3UCY= 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=F8bmAIJgJS/iF+/w/AbP8L4+ONu0195SePobqvOlxLt7b/YarG4yTEcag8HTvEDSyS 7qgnv/v4O0J2nnVnA2S6RZ3m2TNaaWVeLvXIEj5gl2UClCok8t6HtDwAA20q/vghlxhW 8SIdq1i1xEeY1HloTXkU7J+jGnH9MJrVzKVlw= Received: by 10.150.172.17 with SMTP id u17mr6902154ybe.33.1305046055086; Tue, 10 May 2011 09:47:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.147.171.4 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 09:47:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <99.15.04851.56069CD4@pb1.pair.com> References: <4DC826B1.4090806@lerdorf.com> <4DC82A36.8090604@lerdorf.com> <4DC83401.2090202@sugarcrm.com> <99.15.04851.56069CD4@pb1.pair.com> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 13:47:14 -0300 Message-ID: To: "Matthew Weier O'Phinney" Cc: internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] annotations again From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com") Hi Matthew, There's just one reason that it cannot be possible to do inside docblocks: - Code with and without comments should act the same. Also, no matter if it's inside docblocks or not, we'd still have a new syntax. No matter what you do. Even a key =3D> value is a new syntax. But it seems that none notice what I've been trying to express with the patch: key =3D> value is not enough. Doctrine and Symfony are 2 projects that requires more than key/value support, because annotations declaration requires state, something not possible with k/v. Anyway, someone asked me previously if other languages support "complex" annotations like I suggest, my answer is YES and I even included in RFC the links to .NET and Java implementation examples. Cheers, On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote: > On 2011-05-10, Drak wrote: >> --0016e6db295ac0d29504a2e4229c >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUTF-8 >> >> On 10 May 2011 09:27, Mike Willbanks wrote: >> >> > I would argue that the introduction of this into the core is adding >> > more feature bloat into the language that is not quite needed at >> > this point. >> >> Annotations cannot be considered bloat because are being used >> increasingly everywhere that is a clear indication that they are >> required as part of the PHP core as much as many of the Spl classes. >> It should be clear by now that the PHP community really do want >> annotations. > > Can you back this up, please? > > Just because developers are using annotations does not necessarily mean > we need a new syntax. > >> At this stage, if someone has done the work to make this >> happen, the discussion really should be more about polishing that >> contribution and making sure it provides a robust solution to this >> feature than trying to postpone or find reasons to put this off. > > I've gone on record as stating that annotations within docblocks are > sufficient, and would rather see native support for parsing docblocks > for annotations than introducing a new syntax. Others have stated the > same. I'd like to see why a new syntax is considered "necessary", and > why native support for docblock annotations is not considered a > reasonable path. > > -- > Matthew Weier O'Phinney > Project Lead =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| matthew@zend.com > Zend Framework =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| http://framework.zend.= com/ > PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --=20 Guilherme Blanco Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480 MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com S=C3=A3o Paulo - SP/Brazil