Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64785
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <50EDD202.806@zerocue.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:24:34 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "guilhermeblanco@gmail.com" <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com>
CC: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CADqTB_h4eh4mPi89uRps6vZWXjDEhUtcBopL7jmO-UgRuyf19w@mail.gmail.com> <50EBDEEE.8070605@sugarcrm.com> <CAOfKkdQXh53oxpCQ59R_hcws4Pd=q+O_VMOZ=tS+F2_7qof3RA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091204370.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl> <50EDA1C5.4040500@sugarcrm.com> <CADyq6s+SUBGGgvLFxFLaN+mMMP8j1iWWmQdr+uxn1YDRkXwYNA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFp73XvQimu4z7VTJ065HJteeL65xMODpJGyRuz=jjSymKdvcg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFp73XvQimu4z7VTJ065HJteeL65xMODpJGyRuz=jjSymKdvcg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reflection annotations reader
From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest)

This version of annotations (attributes?) is much more interesting than 
the most recent version, but I could see this syntax as being a problem 
if it were allowed to apply to plain functions because then the parser 
would have difficulty distinguishing from an array.  I suppose the same 
could be said of applying it to a class.

In essence though, this prior revision is exactly the kind of thing that 
I would be interested in if we could get past the parsing issues...

On 1/9/2013 1:57 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote:
> Pierrick, before update v3 of patch, let's first clarify things that need
> to be discussed.
> Rasmus, you have no idea how happy you made me for a gentle comment
> pointing something we should think before propose a patch instead of on
> (sorry for the wording) bitching about the idea.
>
> There're tons of elements that need to be addressed before working on a
> patch.
> The latest annotations RFC is a small subset of what other languages
> support. To a more complete feature-wise, it is required to go to a
> previous revision: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations?rev=1302087566
>
> Some of the elements that needs to be considered:
>
> - Should we support nested annotations?
>
> - How [Foo()] will be different from new Foo()? If they are not different,
> is there an alternative to not bloat lexical parsing?
>
> - How parameters would be injected? Is constructor the only way to inject
> parameters?
>
> - How would we handle optional parameters, like [Foo("bar", null, null,
> "woo")]?
>
> - Suppose you wanna fix the optional arguments by named parameters, like
> [Foo("bar", test="woo")]. Doesn't it diverge with PHP interests of not
> supporting parametrized arguments? Should we modify the former or the
> later? Personally I'm a fan of named parameters.
>
> - How would we deal with inheritance? Should a method, for example, inherit
> the same annotations from parent or not?
>
> - Suppose that you define annotations to fix the inheritance problem, how
> would it be?
>
> - How would we cast possible usages of an annotation to only class, method
> or property? Using annotations too?
>
> - How would it be the syntax to declare a new annotation?
>
> - Would it be possible to modify an annotation value using Reflection, for
> example?
>
> - How could it be handled on APC to minimize the performance impact?
>
>
> Let's discuss? Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @Stas we've already come to that, and this is a way to store metadata: the
>> discussion here is just if and how it should get to PHP :)
>>
>> Marco Pivetta
>>
>> http://twitter.com/Ocramius
>>
>> http://ocramius.github.com/
>>
>
>

-- 
-Clint