Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64441
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E6.10.31048.34C1BD05@pb1.pair.com>
References: <8D.41.07178.7380BD05@pb1.pair.com> <CANVTSm4KiD8uY_aXLhSzhC9ER947PdHjtjGSjaGHvxqH9S3i_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <E6.10.31048.34C1BD05@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:12:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CANVTSm6GAAFThD-Cz3jk3ndV6D8GYJVy+d8WxPHeciy-Zh8FaA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yussuf Khalil <dev@pp3345.de>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1eff285159304d1c8b956
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Add a deprecated modifier for functions
From: g.b.yahav@gmail.com (Yahav Gindi Bar)

--e89a8fb1eff285159304d1c8b956
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Yussuf Khalil <dev@pp3345.de> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> assuming that you are referring to the RFC about annotations (
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**annotations<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations>)
> I don't think that annotations are needed in PHP. Declarations that
> actually have an impact on the language itself (like deprecated) should
> rather be implemented as function modifiers while annotations with simple
> information (like <Author("Mr. X")>) can also be stored in the doc comment
> (as @author Mr. X). However, I see that Reflection methods like
> getAnnotation() and hasAnnotation() can be useful sometimes. We could
> implement methods that fetch information from the doc comment for these
> cases, for example getDocTag($name) and hasDocTag($name).
>
>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Yussuf Khalil <dev@pp3345.de> wrote:
>>
>>  Hello,
>>>
>>> I have created an RFC about adding a deprecated modifier for functions in
>>> PHP, see https://wiki.php.net/rfc/****deprecated-modifier<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**deprecated-modifier>
>>> <https://**wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecated-**modifier<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecated-modifier>
>>> >.
>>>
>>> What are your thoughts on this?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Yussuf Khalil
>>>
>>> --
>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>>
>>>
>>>  Hi!
>> I think the idea of marking functions as deprecated is great and the
>> current way of throwing E_DEPRECATED error by trigger_error can be
>> improved. In the current state.
>>
>> That's being said, I don't think that adding a deprecated keyword is the
>> solution, since now we can write documentation and set a "@deprecated"
>> mark.
>> I think, that the best solution is the attributes concept that was
>> rejected
>> before and should be re-considered after the last releases changes and
>> language improvements.
>> A few built in attributes, such as <Deprecated> can be great.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
The point of adding a methods to get annotations from the docblock is good
for itself and I think that we should create RFC about it.
However, I do think that because annotations gives you to execute custom
code it has pros that the deprecated keyword or any other keyword can't
gives you.

Because it's not a discussion about annotation and I've suggested it as an
alternative I'll back to the topic.

I have to agree with Eugene and Nikita since as I see it, the current
implementation has limitation that trigger_error solve. In addition, even
now when using modern IDE and setting @deprecated annotation in the
docblock you can see a warning when calling this method, so I don't see
much reason to add a keyword just for that.

--e89a8fb1eff285159304d1c8b956--