Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64691
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50EC2BB4.7000503@lsces.co.uk>
References: <50EC2BB4.7000503@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:27:54 +0100
Message-ID: <CADyq6sJ-DOvMnKdWjNqr8ncEBAp7r8Zg8J7Tnd6Ex1J-kRYFmw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011840c092463b04d2c7c1a9
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 'Documentation'
From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta)

--089e011840c092463b04d2c7c1a9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Heya,

Actually, annotations became a form of configuration, very powerful when
dealing with AOP and metadata. Very useful when your classes are tightly
coupled with config. If you never came to use them or never felt the need
to use them, fine.

But I wouldn't call it "further complexity without a real need" :)

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius

http://ocramius.github.com/


On 8 January 2013 15:22, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:

> Having been using 'docblock' elements to document classes in PHP for many
> years, their use by PHPEclipse and PDE to provide type-hinting and via
> phpdocumentor to build developer documentation for classes, I simply
> haven't seen any need for some of the more recent developments.
>
> Reflection/Annotations are just another way of 'documenting' classes -
> aren't they? It's not a level of complexity that I have seen a need for, in
> the same way that 'Accessors' just seem to be further complexity without a
> real need for many users.
>
> By using established practices and developing them as extensions that can
> be disabled if not required, then we can all work with the level of
> complexity that we are comfortable with? 'docblock' comments make the code
> readable, and can be stripped in much the same way as javascript is
> 'packed' for running code, but using the same standard as the basis for
> other extensions information that can be parsed/compiled as required does
> have some sort of logic? The information required is on the whole the same
> for the IDE and documentation and currently a large swath of code already
> has all of the core comments already? Surely the starting point is to
> ensure that the basic docblock standards work with all of the 'new'
> features, and then everything else builds on top of that?
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=**contact<http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact>
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.**uk<http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--089e011840c092463b04d2c7c1a9--