Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64798
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.219.53 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABo032Ed2b5AU_Ytj5y9xW5=STYR_0Lg6TL5r+thAYBm2ryuxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nEWD7SYjjN_kia9rSknjL2BKi157G1r5VJPfTkHB4Y5ww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPaKmRn1w2k9O24j29SUFxO5KuWf6UWE1aZZ_urZyiroi_NfxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAyV7nHafth_86-t+z1d=m6=8Pspewniz+pdYFBEjyjhrWt-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADajX4Bib0Zk7v+pHw4ntUhHTmKbrrbmGehbJuogujyOZ=Ce9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABo032FEnizYOB4qTHdytsJpadR2o1hcHwvfvBLnd0aLoskLVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADajX4BdqodBwbs7YmN8dFOP_g+mXrN80uJD=xFVF_q4H-4WgA@mail.gmail.com> <CABo032Ed2b5AU_Ytj5y9xW5=STYR_0Lg6TL5r+thAYBm2ryuxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 00:31:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFp73XtVeKUYYYEcFnVf-=23h3bT3Y5opaX7VQHo-ru0RGzYEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tyler Sommer <sommertm@gmail.com>
Cc: Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net>, "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54d3ed2bfaa3804d2e87d5d
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

--bcaec54d3ed2bfaa3804d2e87d5d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'd love if Stas, Derick, Rasmus or Zeev comment here on criteria about
acceptance of new features.
You all claim that PHP is simple, that features include should be widely
used and only important functions, classes that have regular and extensive
usage would be in.

I wonder how Annotations is different from Traits or Aspects.
They all include new tokens on parser, they all "slow down" (as you keep
claiming everytime) and they all have specific niches to be used. Now I
wonder how Traits got IN, Aspects got rejected in 2007 and Annotations is
being a nightmare to you guys.
Or will you guys claim that Traits will be vastly used?

Also talking about widely used support, I wonder about how
SplDoubleLinkedList, SplInt, SplMaxHeap and all these classes that have
very specific usages, just like also data structure readers like
json_decode, parse_ini_file are part of the core while others also used as
much as these ones like yaml_file are out.

If this is a clear vision, sorry, I'm probably too dumb to understand.

OOP is a trend in PHP and no matter what you guys try to do, procedural
support is quite decent, OOP is getting there aswell as functional. We're
just trying to improve OOP, which lacks of many different features that
many users ask and keep hitting the wall.
You guys may now know, but 9 out of 10 most used frameworks are entirely
OO. It's a shame that because Yahoo code is procedural (worked at Yahoo
already), SugarCRM code has terrible OO decisions (I've seen its code),
adopting exceptions handling !!!in July 2012!!! that makes you guys say
there's no need to improve on OO features that community is claiming.
I implemented support in 2009, asked for this in 2010 and since then I've
seen only in this ML the same feature being asked not by me at least more
10 times. Isn't it a sign of a feature demand?


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Tyler Sommer <sommertm@gmail.com> wrote:

> Great points, Adam. I disagree with this one feature being excluded but I
> do agree that just because something is in the userland doesn't necessari=
ly
> mean it should be in the core-- making my point rather moot.
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Adam Harvey <aharvey@php.net> wrote:
>
> > On 10 January 2013 10:05, Tyler Sommer <sommertm@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Annotations are already a part of PHP. They are widely used in one of
> the
> > > most prolific frameworks, Symfony, and it's ORM "counterpart" Doctrin=
e.
> >
> > To explain what I meant by "PHP", since I think we're arguing
> > semantics there: I mean php-src specifically, rather than the broader
> > userland community, since we're on Internals.
> >
> > > To say "they shouldn't be part of PHP" is fine, but it's too late for
> > that.
> > > Annotations are already here. Are we going to just ignore this fact a=
nd
> > hold
> > > back what a very significant portion of the community wants to see
> > because
> > > it conflicts with some ambiguous master plan for PHP?
> >
> > I don't have a master plan (that would be the part of this thread I'm
> > not touching), but if it's a poorly thought out feature, sure. Pretty
> > much every major project out there uses a unit testing framework and
> > ORM: does that mean we should also be including equivalents for
> > PHPUnit and Doctrine in core?
> >
> > Basically, I think the trend towards configuration as behaviour is an
> > antipattern that results in less readable, harder to debug code.
> > Having said that, the beauty of our userland being a set of
> > communities is that each community can make their own decisions =E2=80=
=94
> > since the good folks behind Doctrine have written an excellent
> > annotation parser, those who want to go that way can, but it doesn't
> > mean PHP has to go out of its way to encourage it.
> >
> > Or, to put it another way, not everything has to be a language
> > feature. That way lies Perl.
> >
> > Adam
> >
>



--=20
Guilherme Blanco
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
GTalk: guilhermeblanco
Toronto - ON/Canada

--bcaec54d3ed2bfaa3804d2e87d5d--