Re: annotations again

Hi Stas, Comments inline. On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote: > Hi! > >> If possible, could you look at the patch and give me high level ideas >> of what could be changed? > > If the patch is the same RFC that is at > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations, the same problems that > were voiced a > number of times on the list stay: > Currently it's not. When I was going to update it, wiki went offline. > - it is overly complex (see class User example - it's really a piece of > code, I think it should be in the code) That's just an example. I'll simplify it. The main point there was to illustrate the ability to support nested annotations. Exmaple using @: @A(@B) > - it introduces method call syntax not compatible with the rest of PHP > - it introduces object instantiation syntax not compatible with the rest of > PHP This is already fixed. @A(@B) would require class A like this: class A { public function __construct(B $b) { ... } } class B {} > > These issues were mentioned before - were they fixed? So your short answer is yes. =) > The RFC also does not clarify where the code contained in annotations is run > and how it would play with bytecode caches. Sorry, this was one of the things that I was going to update. I'll include it too. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 > -- Guilherme Blanco Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480 MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com São Paulo - SP/Brazil