Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93085 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5835 invoked from network); 5 May 2016 08:08:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 May 2016 08:08:53 -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 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:42727] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 5F/E9-16256-39FFA275 for ; Thu, 05 May 2016 04:08:52 -0400 Received: (qmail 14275 invoked by uid 89); 5 May 2016 08:08:48 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 14269, pid: 14272, t: 0.2791s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 5 May 2016 08:08:48 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <5723F2AE.2020806@garfieldtech.com> <8a7d1e8a-1e9e-0bbd-912a-21201638b989@gmail.com> <7f04c375-9f6f-f107-fe5a-a39c19bcd05c@zend.com> Message-ID: <572AFF90.70906@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 09:08:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7f04c375-9f6f-f107-fe5a-a39c19bcd05c@zend.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Attributes/Annotations Case Study: Drupal From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 05/05/16 08:34, Dmitry Stogov wrote: >> I think this way can give a good start point with possibility to >> standardize handling of attributes in the future. From the PHP engine >> side, all attributes are AST nodes that can be processed later on the >> userland side. >> > Something like this may be implemented, but it should be well designed > and approved first. > I'm not sure if this functionality should be especially implemented as > part of Reflection API (this is easily implementable in PHP itself). > But in any case, this requires the base attribute functionality proposed > in RFC (or some other). That is all I'm asking ... I thought initially the rfc defined more than it does, but just creating another 'free for all' on how something is used seems a pointless exercise? -- 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