Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93290
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain beberlei.de from 74.125.82.41 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADqTB_jDgHxo80C9A7NuQ6gECBOzC4nTijPyofTVKmLopwaQdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BY2PR0201MB17842998E88EF93DEEA9ABACBF710@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<CAEPJdumSdAQvf6gx57QFROOQY_fwfq9R2-d4M4giZPUqLnu7WQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADyq6sLABxW4D0=7kwHe5wd6tbGX3yRFzaSAv2GJe2A8uJXAhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADqTB_jDgHxo80C9A7NuQ6gECBOzC4nTijPyofTVKmLopwaQdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 21:27:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEPJdukON9tn1ELR2Neha=6pSPcbP_6xw-sk6_hgtXiktrqu=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk>
Cc: Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, 
	internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b874c24e64f8e0532aa257c
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] PHP Attributes
From: kontakt@beberlei.de (Benjamin Eberlei)

--047d7b874c24e64f8e0532aa257c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk> wrote:

> My problem with this PSR is you've created something that strongly
> resembles function or constructor calls, but in reality is just
> key/value pairs.
>

Its actually function calls, not constructors calls :-)

>
> That's confusing in itself, but also puts an unnecessary burden on
> consumers who have to figure out how to map this apparently
> "something" to "something real" - since it really isn't anything other
> than pretty syntax for arrays associated with source-code elements.
>
> Did anybody look at my notes here?
>
> https://gist.github.com/mindplay-dk/ebd5e4f7da51da3c4e56232adef41b46
>
> I think this is much simpler and far more flexible - it lets you do
> what you're proposing with attributes (by annotating with simple
> arrays) and also lets you create annotation classes.
>
> Would anyone care to comment?
>

What happens if you say <<$x>> and then call $reflection->getAttributes()
in your eample? what is $x?

That is the problem with immediately evaluating everything non "constant".
There is no context.

>
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12 May 2016 at 16:29, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi internals,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I've started voting on "PHP Attributes" RFC.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > In my opinion, "PHP Attributes" might be a smart tool for PHP
> extension,
> >> > but it's not going to be the end of the world, if we decided to live
> with
> >> > doc-comments only.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks. Dmitry.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I voted -1
> >>
> >> Reasons: from a Doctrine Annotations maintainer perspective, either
> getting
> >> a list (without keys) of strings back or ast\nodes are not enough or way
> >> too advanced for our use-case. The middle ground is missing where a
> >> <php-constant> (Name borrowed from the RFC) can be an arbitrarily deep
> >> nested array, that means getAttributes() does should not only return
> >> "string" or ast\node as result for each attribute, to there should be a
> way
> >> to get arrays back.
> >>
> >> Example:
> >>
> >> https://gist.github.com/beberlei/18db9f7d5f6157b817348a58fa2aee25
> >>
> >> greetings
> >> Benjamin
> >>
> >
> > Urgh, that is indeed quirky, and makes it unusable.
> >
> > Is that an implementation or a spec issue? I know PHP 5.6+ allows array
> > constants, but I am not aware of whether that is in the specification.
> >
> > Indeed, show-stopper here. I'll have to vote "-1" for now, and wait for a
> > version that either explicitly contains any constant expression or just
> > supports arrays as constants.
> >
> > I'll also need to compile the branch and try it out myself before voting
> > further: my bad for being hasty.
> >
> > Marco Pivetta
> >
> > http://twitter.com/Ocramius
> >
> > http://ocramius.github.com/
>

--047d7b874c24e64f8e0532aa257c--