Lester, 2015-07-12 5:27 GMT-03:00 Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk>: > On 12/07/15 09:10, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >>> Not completely bogus. At least with typed properties you won't need to >>> > actually write the docblocks to have the IDE "hints". It's a minor win >>> > for IDE users too. >> I don't see "not needing to write docblocks" as a win, quite the >> contrary. In fact, in a number of projects I worked with, code without >> proper documentation (including docblocks) simply wasn't accepted into >> the repository. >> >> While I don't think this needs to be mandatory, I also don't see major >> difference - so you have to write type instead of docblock, you still >> have to write something. > > In addition, the docblock contains a lot more material than just a few > types, so one still needs to have one. The main problem with adding > types is they become part of the code, while a docblock can simple be > stripped. >
Please refer to reply given to Stas. > As a 'minor win for IDE users' it is also questionable since the every > IDE will need to be re-written to support both methods of working. > You meant "updated" not "re-written". IDEs that want to stay relevant to the community will always be updated, and hæck, it's much easier to analyze real language syntax as opposed to uncertain user space DSLs inside comments. IDE maintainers won't complain about that, for sure. > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > Marcio -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
