Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64612
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <45FD2112-5469-48A2-8941-92415EC711E1@strojny.net>
References: <CANVTSm5XE69i=KkZV621+tmwWbSKnsHECN0UsLin7mdBTc+jOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <45FD2112-5469-48A2-8941-92415EC711E1@strojny.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 00:35:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CANVTSm5U-co=opgLXfgwhETBDwp-EKhGKzibgEmt=FCzSpX=vA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54b4a566fcca604d2a656fd
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reflection annotations reader
From: g.b.yahav@gmail.com (Yahav Gindi Bar)

--bcaec54b4a566fcca604d2a656fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net> wrote:

> Hi Yahav,
>
> Am 06.01.2013 um 22:58 schrieb Yahav Gindi Bar <g.b.yahav@gmail.com>:
> [...]
> > In one of the discussions (about the "deprecated" keyword, to be
> specific),
> > it was been said that adding ability to read doc-comment annotation cou=
ld
> > be handy. Personally, I really think it can be great.
> >
> > So, I've created an RFC that propose to improve the Reflection extensio=
n
> by
> > adding the ability to read annotations decorated in the doc-comment.
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflection_doccomment_annotations
> >
> > What is your opinion about this?
>
> Hi!

I do agree with you two about the difference between my proposal and the
way that Doctorine and other FW implemented that, and as I've told - its a
first draft of the proposal - the main idea is to get the ability to have
static metadata. I'll implement the actual patch after we'll agree on the
way it should work :).

About Doctorine implementation, firstly - the parser code is... hugh, I
really think that we should do something about that!
However, I don't think that we should make, like their implementation -
ability to create constructors and such, otherwise, it'll look just like
Attributes...
I think that our work is to isolate each annotation so it'll be easy to
access, then, it'll be easy enough to write the code that creates "complex
annotations", such as constructors and so on, in userland.



> From what I've seen in various components using annotations, this kind of
> support wouldn=92t be enough. I would much prefer direct mapping of a sin=
gle
> annotation on a class including a way to define properties and such. This
> is how e.g. Doctrine, Symfony, Zend Framework etc. all utilize annotation=
s
> nowadays.
>
> Can you provide an example?


> cu,
> Lars

--bcaec54b4a566fcca604d2a656fd--