Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81941 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 22545 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2015 16:11:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 2015 16:11:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=francois@tekwire.net; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=francois@tekwire.net; sender-id=softfail Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain tekwire.net does not designate 212.27.42.2 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: francois@tekwire.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.27.42.2 smtp2-g21.free.fr Received: from [212.27.42.2] ([212.27.42.2:25024] helo=smtp2-g21.free.fr) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 00/D2-27691-F1693D45 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 11:11:13 -0500 Received: from moorea (unknown [82.240.16.115]) by smtp2-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87B0D4B01D5; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 17:07:49 +0100 (CET) Reply-To: To: "'Yasuo Ohgaki'" , "'Pierre Joye'" Cc: "'PHP internals'" , "'Dmitry Stogov'" References: <01d601d04146$6fbda4c0$4f38ee40$@tekwire.net> <020c01d0414b$2c3a1120$84ae3360$@tekwire.net> In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 17:11:02 +0100 Message-ID: <023201d0415e$5731d800$05958800$@tekwire.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGgxP9HPTh52uHWkGo6jLSeXRdtNAIuYisqAXiAI4oCe0Gg3wHoiozGAesUmP+c8XxJUA== Content-Language: fr X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 150205-0, 05/02/2015), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Design by Contract From: francois@tekwire.net (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?=) > De : yohgaki@gmail.com [mailto:yohgaki@gmail.com] De la part de Yasuo = Ohgaki > We don't have to integrate DbC into phpdoc. phpdoc may have = integration of new DbC syntax. > I think it's helpful even if phpdoc copies post/pre condition as = document.=20 > > There are too many possibility for DbC syntax. > We are better to choose something in common among languages. No. The more I detail the concept, the more I read alternative = proposals, the more I consider extending phpdoc is the best solution. As = I explain in the RFC, both concepts are closely related, and that's the = only solution I've seen so far that preserves BC. I could add that it = proposes a solution to issues not even detected nor discussed in = alternative proposals, like the syntax for return value, separate check = for arguments returned by ref, built-in type checks, etc. Before we = choose an alternative syntax, I think we should have good reasons, not = 'Hey, that's how it's done in D !'. If there's a good reason to copy D = or Eiffel syntax, let's adopt it, but I haven't read any good reason so = far. And D is not so widely used so there's no user habit. We can copy = the concept without copying the syntax. I think we're going too fast here. Before giving up and switching to = another syntax, can you give me a little time to present what I have in = mind. I started writing it yesterday evening and it will be ready = tomorrow morning (UTC). Then, we can make a decision. Cheers Fran=C3=A7ois