Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64803 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 17337 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2013 07:40:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Jan 2013 07:40:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.26.187 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.123.26.187 c2beaomr09.btconnect.com Received: from [213.123.26.187] ([213.123.26.187:57941] helo=mail.btconnect.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 91/42-02684-2507EE05 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:40:03 -0500 Received: from host81-138-11-136.in-addr.btopenworld.com (EHLO _10.0.0.5_) ([81.138.11.136]) by c2beaomr09.btconnect.com with ESMTP id KHO33518; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:39:59 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <50EE704F.8060100@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:39:59 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Firefox/17.0 SeaMonkey/2.14 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PHP internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0301.50EE704F.0029, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2013.1.10.72726:17:7.944, ip=81.138.11.136, rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __HAS_FROM, __USER_AGENT, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __ANY_URI, __FRAUD_BODY_WEBMAIL, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, BODY_ENDS_IN_URL, BODY_SIZE_3000_3999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, RDNS_SUSP, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr09.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0201.50EE704F.006C:SCFSTAT14830815,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) guilhermeblanco@gmail.com wrote: > 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'd use the past tense there ... And I'll get beaten around the head again. PHP is a very nicely modular 'framework' on top of which many other views of the world have now been built. We DON'T need to load a lot of the recent developments ... we don't need to use them. Personally I don't load any MySQL related extensions since I don't have MySQL loaded. APC is replaced by eaccelerator which continues to work well for me (currently!). I've use phpdocumentor since I started with PHP because that was what all of the libraries USED internally to model/document the API, and since I used Eclipse as my IDE for C/C++ code, PHPEclipse was a natural progression and also uses the docblock information to provide in-line type hinting and a lot of the information that people are now clamouring to build in to the 'language'? I can understand some of the drives to 'new features', but I know I'm not alone in feeling rail-roaded into having to accept changes that are just detracting from writing code. Perhaps we can ignore 'e_strict' but the fundamental problem doing that is that moving 5.2 based code to 5.5 is simply not practical. Setting up a system that will run 5.2 code cleanly on a 5.4 configuration is only practical if you have a completely different set-up for clean 5.4 code! We NEEDED a better vision 5 years ago :( Now we need to manage the fallout and I know I keep banging on about it, but over 50% of user land are STILL using 5.2! Only 1.8% have 5.4 running with the main movement over the last few months TO 5.3 simply because that is the easiest way for ISP's to support their customers. ( http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/pl-php/5/all ) Bolting more and more facilities into core because a few users have the backing to force them in does not help the vast majority of user-land users who don't need those facilities. The argument that they need to be in the core so that ISP's will provide them probably highlights the whole problem? If your application needs some particular 'extension' to work then shouldn't that be part of the 'application' rather than the 'infrastructure'? Isn't the fact that one can add to PHP your own view of the world the whole point here. However it's also the Achilles heel so there ARE now large groups of people 'doing their own thing' and pulling things in a lot of different ways? Not everybody wants the Symphony/Doctrine/ORM view of the world. We are happy with using the database engine as the persistence layer, and a good abstraction layer as the interface ... code written 10 years ago still works ... or should do :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- 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