Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

+1 for Annotations 2010/9/16 Guilherme Blanco <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> > Hi Derick, > > Again, we should not consider docblock mainly because I think > adding/removing comments of your code should NEVER modify the overall > functionality of your application. > That said, docblock is no option. Now PLEASE let's stop arguing for > nothing and vote? > I'd recommend that since syntax is not ideal, we should not vote for > the complete patch but vote for the functionality. > > So the question to be answered is: Should PHP support Annotations? > > I'm +1. > > > Cheers, > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt> > wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:57:01 +0100, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> > wrote: > > > >>> There should be overwhelmingly strong reasons to add a whole new branch > >>> of syntax to PHP, I for one don't see the huge gain annotations bring > on top > >>> of PHPDoc. > >> > >> The only thing I can think of is added the storing of docblock data for > >> class methods and class properties. Right now I think they're not being > >> stored in the oparrays? In any case, I am also not for adding more > >> syntax just to do annotations. > >> > > > > Have you read my e-mail? > > > > http://news.php.net/php.internals/49674 > > > > I don't understand whether you're against annotations per se or if using > doc > > comments to implement annotations would be okay. > > > > As I said, doc comments as they are now are insufficient. > > > > -- > > Gustavo Lopes > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > -- > Guilherme Blanco > Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480 > MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com > São Paulo - SP/Brazil > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >