Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82866
Return-Path: <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 87464 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2015 17:29:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 16 Feb 2015 17:29:29 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rowan.collins@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rowan.collins@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rowan.collins@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.49 mail-wg0-f49.google.com  
Received: from [74.125.82.49] ([74.125.82.49:41596] helo=mail-wg0-f49.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 0B/B7-36518-8F822E45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:29:28 -0500
Received: by mail-wg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id l18so30704513wgh.8
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:29:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type;
        bh=Qx2R2nFGthRRa7p8hmDPvlfZi0aqIt0oN0qTIN2ULpU=;
        b=D4K5zGBQxasqB+AAYhHcIWtq90AAQwmEIl3ULg7mxkBUMJMxVBV/eK3F6fWRnq2SLN
         4v6JdKmeco65TdCT/EvqG4gkmZtdjQbkjYggM7Vlon519enZ1rp8K3B8tMrD+FKkjXpm
         ZO4o+YzTv0p3M04CMkY/VfB4UjeSBJrUBwOnCEl7wdrTfIV/niqoAG+DZj/mRZ2hiKyE
         sPtpWgPll3S5l6dIvhJCNE+jauNBhiFE0lWX5rBpEcJosWXUrjOicE1gYQXOOOSBTiEX
         RZzxEzf2SGYOy9tzAhWKT85sIk90yuMHSZyC7eJbVqzqaHahaCVYPA4zfJeJimrfBVkK
         m+ow==
X-Received: by 10.180.88.165 with SMTP id bh5mr36508530wib.35.1424107765473;
        Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:29:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.172] ([62.189.198.114])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lu13sm20580996wic.10.2015.02.16.09.29.23
        for <internals@lists.php.net>
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:29:24 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54E228F1.7060307@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:29:21 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CA+9eiLsxSpbdaa7Bpci2PRXQMRkTUiwZphjQYv2iDyXLUhrMow@mail.gmail.com>	<CAF+90c95=uEdXgmdfTyCvkVk1TU2hpb40Nk9P0zw9FwFV_Nhrw@mail.gmail.com>	<54E20FC0.3060104@gmail.com> <CA+9eiLu9+nbDPC02Q2+1gpu4f3yLqv4OoMKTQKqDRJdN_anL4A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+9eiLu9+nbDPC02Q2+1gpu4f3yLqv4OoMKTQKqDRJdN_anL4A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------060509060209040903010404"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

--------------060509060209040903010404
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com 
<mailto:rowan.collins@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Is there any value in deciding the initial syntax for 7.0, and
    implementing only non-parameterised annotations, i.e. you can call
    hasAnnotation(string): bool but nothing else?


Dmitry Stogov wrote on 16/02/2015 16:02:
> this will work, of course, and robust implementation wouldn't take 
> more than a day :)
> but it'll require user-level parser again. no big advantage in 
> comparison to doc-block.

No user-level parser would be required (or even possible), because 
parameters would be illegal, not just unparsed.

So, for example, the following would be legal in 7.0:

<<IsMagic>>
function foo() { }

if ( (new ReflectionFunction('foo'))->hasAnnotation('IsMagic') ) ...


But the following would be illegal, even though a similar syntax would 
be being prototyped for use in 7.1:

<<HasMagic('Expelliamus!')>>
function foo() { }

$magic = (new ReflectionFunction('foo'))->getAnnotation('HasMagic');


A few use cases would be possible just with boolean flags, and it would 
give us a base to work with going forward.

It also avoids the situation (as discussed in another thread) of trying 
to implement every detail of the implementation of the feature before 
checking for consensus. In this case we can check that people are in 
favour of:
1) adding annotations as a core feature
2) the basic syntax (<Foo>, <<Foo>>, [Foo], @Foo, etc)

If there's an overwhelming Yes, that's a confidence boost for whoever 
works on the harder parts over the following months.

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]



--------------060509060209040903010404--