Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78158
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fischer.name from 62.179.121.37 cause and error)
Message-ID: <5444E172.10602@fischer.name>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:18:26 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAFMT4No9Z-rDJ5s46vgrcOJPSxTDQZWs+K2myJt4H8517n=B=Q@mail.gmail.com>	<54441174.5000303@fischer.name> <CAGAGxbYMuZScuGdiLPsyWNMQOnFFh8wZH9zi8TRZZw3uSuiHSQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGAGxbYMuZScuGdiLPsyWNMQOnFFh8wZH9zi8TRZZw3uSuiHSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam_score: -2.9
X-Spam_score_int: -28
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "scanner01.home", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Hi Chris, On 20.10.14 12:10, Chris Wright wrote: [...] in
   depth summary of future idea ReflectionType Thanks a lot for the clarification
    and regarding the future expansion of the use of ReflectionType I now better
    understand most points and why they're currently are that way. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (-2.9 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED            Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
 -1.9 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
                             [score: 0.0000]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Reflection-API
From: markus@fischer.name (Markus Fischer)

Hi Chris,

On 20.10.14 12:10, Chris Wright wrote:
[...] in depth summary of future idea ReflectionType

Thanks a lot for the clarification and regarding the future expansion of
the use of ReflectionType I now better understand most points and why
they're currently are that way.

I don't think I've anything more of value to add (except thanks to the
hard work to all) but I guess I would prefer to see my point 5) being
addressed.

thanks,
- Markus