Re: Design by Contract
| From: | Pierre Joye | Date: | Fri, 06 Feb 2015 04:23:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Design by Contract | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-82010@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:14 AM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com
<guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Pierre,
>
> Sorry, but you don't. Proposing a simple syntax is the same as not proposing
> it.
> We can do whatever syntax is proposed, but we need to discuss on how to
> handle inheritance, overriding, etc.
> None ever discussed that. 2010's patch handled all that nicely. I do
> remember however Dmitry had a suggestion to optimize the overall storage of
> annotation values, but it got lost in time. I somehow remember he wanted to
> store a cached version of reflection class into the class entry and expose
> as Class::CLASS or something... I saw this written in another place too...
> it got slightly changed over time and we now have it return only its FQCN.
Benjamin proposed it and I think it is a good compromise, it can then
evolve if necessary or desired.