Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64856 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5470 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2013 09:20:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 11 Jan 2013 09:20:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=amaury.bouchard@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=amaury.bouchard@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.51 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: amaury.bouchard@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.213.51 mail-yh0-f51.google.com Received: from [209.85.213.51] ([209.85.213.51:46073] helo=mail-yh0-f51.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9A/79-02684-749DFE05 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 04:20:07 -0500 Received: by mail-yh0-f51.google.com with SMTP id f73so273057yha.10 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 01:20:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=euzhatZnZeebJDOECOmC2F0M2m1mF5UFXXcecpB32vk=; b=gduNGeHNVakRZwNDdbVpzZQPkcw8ah6cDc25+O25V5l3OIqz2uNUQFWoy2YlCDJoPz eHtU1xQJUBnLzum738RNhpexeUEDmSXjcIxPCiljZXOELDcgQeE8eFIpmGAVhnEEv7qN uwWmUOIOD7lfyExSRaZ7DnIfhABNzmUmEiO13MiQjQuSPb6BeHw79qDU0tDN3o41AE6G 4w5Xd8nhW0bWTt+4Tr0nNU5JOs3Lr/6cbAfVdjNRbB2t/YrbUnalPaphVYjL3q7hdFXR HGuMUvsEcBtpYEmkYdRTu6kJFGh7+NKXdQYhN8dcGXQpblLqGa2Boq5BMBg0Fnar/wid XELw== Received: by 10.236.118.193 with SMTP id l41mr85073238yhh.50.1357896005115; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 01:20:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: amaury.bouchard@gmail.com Received: by 10.146.16.26 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 01:19:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <50EDBEA5.1050201@sugarcrm.com> <50EE5DAF.2080901@sugarcrm.com> <50EF2195.3080907@sugarcrm.com> <50EF49AF.9050801@b1-systems.de> <48412E0A-3FCC-440D-8479-39B666EB7213@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:19:44 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PcOwN95W7KA-am24II4JIGI-H14 Message-ID: To: dukeofgaming Cc: Yahav Gindi Bar , Ralf Lang , "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300fa97d06e0ad04d2ffcd51 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision From: amaury@amaury.net (Amaury Bouchard) --20cf300fa97d06e0ad04d2ffcd51 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2013/1/11 dukeofgaming > I have a question, maybe it is dumb: why not those opposed to using > annotations just... refrain from using them? > As I said in a previous message: =AB (...) providing annotations as it is proposed will make them a core feature of the language. It will be perceived like objects, exceptions, interfaces or visibility. And the direct impact is that PHP will be seen as a more complex language. A really. More. Complexe. Language. =BB The discussion is not about how to put every single programming concept inside PHP, and then choose if we want to use them or not. It's about choosing which programming concepts would fit well in PHP. If annotations means a new language in the language, it's questionable (from the end-user point of view as well as for technical reasons in PHP's core). Horizontal reusability (traits) hasn't this problem. --20cf300fa97d06e0ad04d2ffcd51--