On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 05/08/2011 04:40 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
I has been almost a month since we did our routine talk about 5.4, so
here it goes again. The patch for the scalar hints seems to be pretty
simple (see
Hi!
another thing that I would love to see on the list: named parameters.
it was recently brought up, and I think that the original argument for
the rejection isn't true anymore:
http://www.php.net/~derick/meeting-notes.html#named-parameters
adding naming parameters would actually help to make
Hi:
On 09 May 2011, at 09:50, Stas Malyshev wrote:
I'm all for this idea, but the question is - can we have a good design
implementation in next 2 months? If we can, great, if we can't - I'd rather
have 5.4 than wait for it. E.g., if we have somebody ready to commit for
certain timeframe
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
another thing that I would love to see on the list: named parameters.
it was recently brought up, and I think that the original argument for
the rejection isn't true anymore:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Stefan Marr p...@stefan-marr.de wrote:
Hi:
On 09 May 2011, at 09:50, Stas Malyshev wrote:
I'm all for this idea, but the question is - can we have a good design
implementation in next 2 months? If we can, great, if we can't - I'd rather
have 5.4 than wait
Hi!
I see the array shortcuts are on your todo discussion list there. We
probably shouldn't get into a full discussion on that since it will span
hundreds of messages. But if any of the folks who voted no last time
around have changed their minds, it would be good to know. And before
deciding,
Hi,
what is the status of traits, or like the wiki calls it Horizontal Reuse
for PHP.
AFAIR I got notice of it on the FrOsCon 2008/2009(?), since then lot
time passed and the last update on the wiki ist from November last Year.
I'm just curious, when will this feature be implemented in a stable
Hi,
I'd love if you ever discuss these items for 5.4:
- ReflectionNamespace
Currently it's impossible to grab a docblock that documents an
Annotations, for example, or even access the namespace declaration.
It's also impossible to check which use is declared on the
namespace/file/class scope.
Martin Scotta
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd love if you ever discuss these items for 5.4:
- ReflectionNamespace
Currently it's impossible to grab a docblock that documents an
Annotations, for example, or even access
On 9 May 2011 15:44, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that you are not interested on user's request and
rather accept/implement only what the features that interest you. It's
very bad for the language and very bad for all of users.
But surely it is a
On May 9, 2011, at 2:38 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
I see the array shortcuts are on your todo discussion list there. We
probably shouldn't get into a full discussion on that since it will span
hundreds of messages. But if any of the folks who voted no last time
around have changed their
On 05/09/2011 07:44 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
- Annotations
I already proposed a patch and none here discussed. You rather
preferred to shout PHP doesn't need Annotations instead of discuss
the patch that was proposed.
If someone doesn't agree that annotations belong in PHP why do
Hi!
It seems to me that you are not interested on user's request and
rather accept/implement only what the features that interest you. It's
very bad for the language and very bad for all of users.
Of course we are interested in user's requests, and we implemented tons
of features at user's
regarding the annotations stuff: it seems the php community (in
general) really wants annotations. lots of important and widely used
frameworks use them (meaning that not only the plain php users have a
use for this feature, but also the users of the respective frameworks,
increasing the overall
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Marcelo Gornstein marce...@gmail.com wrote:
regarding the annotations stuff: it seems the php community (in
general) really wants annotations. lots of important and widely used
frameworks use them (meaning that not only the plain php users have a
use for this
Hi!
my question is: is php a language made for the php developers that
mantain the language or for the community that uses them and
contributes to it everyday?
Please stop trying to manipulate developers by suggesting if they don't
do exactly what you want they hate (or don't care for) all
Stas Malyshev wrote:
It seems to me that you are not interested on user's request and
rather accept/implement only what the features that interest you. It's
very bad for the language and very bad for all of users.
Of course we are interested in user's requests, and we implemented tons
of
mm i don't remember saying anything like that :) i dont want to start
an argument here, but maybe you'd like to take things less personal
and re-read my post.
anyway, i think it's time to stop just saying no, and really
collaborate with what the community is suggesting (and already
propsed) in
-Original Message-
From: Stas Malyshev [mailto:smalys...@sugarcrm.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 4:41 PM
To: PHP Internals
Subject: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
Hi!
I has been almost a month since we did our routine talk about 5.4, so here it
goes again. The patch for the scalar
On 2011-05-09, Marcelo Gornstein marce...@gmail.com wrote:
regarding the annotations stuff: it seems the php community (in
general) really wants annotations. lots of important and widely used
frameworks use them (meaning that not only the plain php users have a
use for this feature, but also
On Mon, 9 May 2011, Marcelo Gornstein wrote:
mm i don't remember saying anything like that :) i dont want to start
an argument here, but maybe you'd like to take things less personal
and re-read my post.
anyway, i think it's time to stop just saying no, and really
collaborate with what the
-Original Message-
From: Marcelo Gornstein [mailto:marce...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 10:20 AM
To: Stas Malyshev
Cc: guilhermebla...@gmail.com; PHP Internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] annotations again
mm i don't remember saying anything like that :) i dont want to start
Hi Rasmus,
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 05/09/2011 07:44 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
- Annotations
I already proposed a patch and none here discussed. You rather
preferred to shout PHP doesn't need Annotations instead of discuss
the
On 05/09/2011 07:44 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that you are not interested on user's request and
rather accept/implement only what the features that interest you. It's
very bad for the language and very bad for all of users.
Rasmus Stas have already
Hi!
- ReflectionNamespace
- Annotations
- SplArray
- Comparable
Thanks for the list, it's a good start of the discussion. I have only
one note for now - since the goal of all this to try and get 5.4 out
before the end of the year, I think that requires some scope limiting.
By this I mean
Hi Richard,
Again what I commented on other thread and again you barely see what I
mentioned, the feature is ALREADY written in C and compatible with
latest PHP trunk.
I'm not bitching against do and don't dos... I'm bitching about
ignored feature that are not even discussed.
I agree with you,
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Jones [mailto:christopher.jo...@oracle.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 10:28 AM
To: internals@lists.php.net; Guilherme Blanco
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
On 05/09/2011 07:44 AM,
On 05/09/2011 10:32 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Richard,
Again what I commented on other thread and again you barely see what I
mentioned, the feature is ALREADY written in C and compatible with
latest PHP trunk.
I'm not bitching against do and don't dos... I'm bitching about
That's simply not true. But just because one group of users feel strongly
about something doesn't mean it should go in. There has to be some level
of
curation or we end up with every feature under the sun resulting in a
huge
mess.
Are you sure?
Please take a look at every topic
Hi all,
It's funny how far a simple discussion can reach.
I'm not advocating that an specific feature should go in or if not,
stimulate hate on developers.
Quoting what Richard and Derick posted, it's open source.
Any help from any front is very welcome. All I want is a place where
users (the
Rasmus,
I already wrote an RFC, I already wrote a patch and none from php-src
gave me some valuable feedback.
During private conversations while flaming messages were popping on ML
thread, I updated the code to be more PHP compatible and when I went
to update the RFC on wiki, it became offline.
Hi Andi,
That's all I want.
Someone to at least look at the patch and give me feedback.
None here did that, all you're doing is telling no, we don't accept it.
Why don't you give me some valuable feedback so I can work on the
patch to turn it relevant to you?
Regards,
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at
On 05/09/2011 10:48 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Rasmus,
I already wrote an RFC, I already wrote a patch and none from php-src
gave me some valuable feedback.
During private conversations while flaming messages were popping on ML
thread, I updated the code to be more PHP compatible and
Hi Rasmus,
Thanks a lot for the response. This was the first email that I got
that is not rude against my patch.
I have worked on Doctrine annotations support (which is being used by
Symfony and also Typo3), which is a LL(*) parser that processes
docblocks and uses runtime classes to build
Hi!
I'm not bitching against do and don't dos... I'm bitching about
ignored feature that are not even discussed.
I think annotations were discussed very extensively. But I totally can
see how one particular aspect could slip through. In this case it is
right to remind people about it and
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:02 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I promise myself to not revamp this discussion again, but it wasn't me
this time!
@Etienne: That RFC is outdated.
Since the last feedback form internals list, a lot of changes have
been
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:
- it is overly complex (see class User
Hi Ferenc,
I'll update the RFC to match the current implementation.
Pierrick is working to extract a diff more simplified so you can
quickly look at it.
Thanks.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Ferenc Kovacs i...@tyrael.hu wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:02 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 8:35 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
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
Hi Stas,
Comments inline.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@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
Hi:
On 09 May 2011, at 19:25, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure?
Please take a look at every topic defined on wiki page. Is there ANY
topic to be discussed that came from userland?
If you say yes, please point me to the thread. What I clearly see
there is that every feature
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
What I thought it could be changed is:
- Allow PHP to support it natively and also take advantage of opcode cache
- Make API cleaner
Guilherme you still also have to explain WHY we need this. I have a perfectly
functional documentation and hinting setup
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Ferenc Kovacs i...@tyrael.hu wrote:
That's simply not true. But just because one group of users feel
strongly
about something doesn't mean it should go in. There has to be some
level
of
curation or we end up with every feature under the sun
Seems like a good plan to me. Hopefully as per schedule it gets us 5.4
this year.
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
Hi!
I has been almost a month since we did our routine talk about 5.4, so here
it goes again. The patch for the scalar hints seems to
-Original Message-
From: guilhermebla...@gmail.com [mailto:guilhermebla...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 10:51 AM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: Christopher Jones; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
Hi Andi,
That's all I want.
Someone to at least look at the
Hi Lester,
I updated the RFC. I may have missed one thing or two, but overall
idea and how code behave is there.
This question is answered on wiki RFC. =)
Here is the direct link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations
Regards,
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
Hi Andi,
Sorry, but I mentioned on other thread that RFC is outdated.
I just finished an update to it bringing to recent implementation. The
idea is to get the big picture here, I may have left from previous
RFC, but if I did that, please just point out and I can fix.
This implementation is *way*
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Lester,
I updated the RFC. I may have missed one thing or two, but overall
idea and how code behave is there.
This question is answered on wiki RFC. =)
Here is the direct link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations
But there is nothing there that explains why
Hi!
I updated the RFC. I may have missed one thing or two, but overall
idea and how code behave is there.
This question is answered on wiki RFC. =)
Here is the direct link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations
Some questions I didn't find the answers in the RFC:
1. When the annotation
Hi Lester,
What you don't see is that you're against having it because you
already had the effort to built this support.
So answering your question related to use cases, you own codebase is a
good example.
You had to create a parser for docblock because PHP doesn't have
support. And now you're
Hi Stas,
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
Hi!
I updated the RFC. I may have missed one thing or two, but overall
idea and how code behave is there.
This question is answered on wiki RFC. =)
Here is the direct link:
Hi!
Objects are only instantiated when requested (getAnnotations() or
getAnnotation())
So how this happens - does the class store the text of the annotation?
Or expressions in the call are evaluated and stored, but the object is
not instantiated?
What if I call getAnnotation() repeatedly -
Hi,
First, the actual patch is working but Implementation and behavior may
change following all comments. This is still a work in progress and all
comments/contributions from everybody are welcome :)
That said :
On 9 May 2011 21:23, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
Hi!
Objects
Guilherme,
As per many of the conversations on annotations one of that hardest parts of
it is that there are generally 3 conversations going on about it when this
starts to be discussed. It seems many threads are hi-jacked and I can
understand why.
I would like to state that annotations in the
Hi,
Annotations as proposed in the RFC can not (or hardly) be develop as an
extension (and so can not go into PECL). The proposed feature require
modifications directly into the Zend Engine like for the inclusion of a new
syntax which imply modification of the parser.
Regards,
Pierrick
On 9
On 10 May 2011 09:27, Mike Willbanks pen...@gmail.com wrote:
I would argue that the introduction of this into the core is adding more
feature bloat into the language that is not quite needed at this point.
Annotations cannot be considered bloat because are being used increasingly
everywhere
Drak wrote:
I would argue that the introduction of this into the core is adding more
feature bloat into the language that is not quite needed at this point.
Annotations cannot be considered bloat because are being used increasingly
everywhere that is a clear indication that they are
57 matches
Mail list logo
