Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64786
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50EDD202.806@zerocue.com>
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> <50EDD202.806@zerocue.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:27:57 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFp73XuL2GEDpujtQv1_BB-NBrjxPUv-o33y35pDgoY-zBvJoQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54d49f20ce45004d2e0e7c5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reflection annotations reader
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

--bcaec54d49f20ce45004d2e0e7c5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Clint,

If you switch from [] to <> everything works like a charm. =)
Everything was working smoothly on version 2. Version 3 was an attempt to
simplify the patch, but removing tons of things that would pop in a few
time if patch was accepted.

Cheers,


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote:

> 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<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
>



-- 
Guilherme Blanco
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
GTalk: guilhermeblanco
Toronto - ON/Canada

--bcaec54d49f20ce45004d2e0e7c5--