Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93095
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 207.46.100.114 as permitted sender)
To: Jesse Schalken <me@jesseschalken.com>, Dan Ackroyd
	<danack@basereality.com>
References: <5723F2AE.2020806@garfieldtech.com>
 <d158ceff-b888-604c-387c-942239c0e783@zend.com>
 <8a7d1e8a-1e9e-0bbd-912a-21201638b989@gmail.com>
 <a9ba942f-309c-e96a-86dc-595b66e4d88d@zend.com>
 <572B5781.4000403@garfieldtech.com>
 <CA+kxMuRyzCUG+c93R-2BZGXXcD=g6oa71TP3L8R=5ToD0D4rnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF1yvAQYAPXj8qjBKE-5uUzDeqnduK3BYR+Co8xFH9wTrsXncw@mail.gmail.com>
CC: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>, "internals@lists.php.net"
	<internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <a852fff8-5d98-01c7-487c-4a00822037cd@zend.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 09:02:13 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF1yvAQYAPXj8qjBKE-5uUzDeqnduK3BYR+Co8xFH9wTrsXncw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 May 2016 06:02:28.4176 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR0201MB1788
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Attributes/Annotations Case Study: Drupal
From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov)



On 05/06/2016 05:06 AM, Jesse Schalken wrote:
> If you're going to say "do what you want" with regards to annotations, then
> just let them be a text string. Parsing the annotation as PHP but not
> evaluating it as PHP seems a very strange and arbitrary half-way point. If
> the thing consuming the AST is expected to eval() it, then why didn't PHP
> do that already? If the thing consuming the AST is expected not to eval()
> it, then it must effectively implement it's own language sharing PHP's
> syntax but not PHP's semantics. Since it can't possibly attach meaning to
> all of PHP's syntax, PHP will enforce that the string is valid PHP even
> though the annotation language will be a very small subset. Not only does
> that buy you very little in terms of validity checking, but it constrains
> the annotation language to be a subset of PHP's syntax even when such a
> constraint may be entirely inappropriate.
>
> A true "do what you want" approach, if that is the right approach, would be
> for the annotation body to be a free text string.

You talk about a subset of the proposed RFC.
It proposes an additional question about AST usage.

Thanks. Dmitry.

>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5 May 2016 at 15:24, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
>>> because it doesn't define "right way".
>> Good.
>>
>>> I could easily see, for instance, Doctrine annotations building the
>>> first, PHPUnit the second, and Zend the 3rd.
>> Good!
>>
>> It's not the job of PHP core to tell people how to use annotations.
>> People can use them however they want.
>>
>> If it turns out that there is a single 'right' way of using them,
>> everyone will gravitate to that way anyway.
>>
>> If it turns out there are different 'right' ways of using them for
>> different use cases, people will be able to pick and choose the
>> use-case that is most appropriate.
>>
>> And most importantly, if what people think is the 'right' way to use
>> them evolves over time, that can be accomplished completely in
>> user-land, without needing to update the internal implementation of
>> annotations.
>>
>> cheers
>> Dan
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>