On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> > I believe you have difficulties explaining these benefits because you
> first need to argue why you want reflected properties all over the place.
> And once that is established (assuming it is), why you would need dedicated
> syntax for it
PhpStorm has the finest refactoring support you can achieve with the
limited amount of static information in PHP source-code, plus hopefully a
whole bunch of @var and @property annotations. With the amount of
information inherent in PHP source-code, plus the volunteer information
provided by annota
> I believe you have difficulties explaining these benefits because you
first need to argue why you want reflected properties all over the place.
And once that is established (assuming it is), why you would need dedicated
syntax for it.
I thought that's what I had been doing? Apparently I've just
On 2013-05-01, at 6:28 AM, Guilherme Capilé wrote:
> Ola Ferenc,
>
> I'm willing to resurrect the development, how can I do it? Right now
> I'm having trouble in making a simple patch applied...
>
...
I support that. When someone has patches to commit, I don't think the
attitude should be
I have to agree with Etienne. Your idea is good, but it is probably better to
implement a better Refactoring support in the IDE rather than enable it through
the language itself. Dynamically typed languages will always struggle with
automatizing refactoring functionalities to a certain extend.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> The only reason being that the syntax "^$user->name" is "more static" than
>> new PropertyReference($user, 'name'), and thus easier to refactor?
>
>
> Not "more static", it is static - a string-based property-reference is not.
>
> Refactori
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:13 PM, PHP Group wrote:
> VCS Account Approved: jas approved by pajoye \o/
>
..And I've fixed the typo in your email address now for your account.
-Hannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Any reason why he is not allowed to update NEWS?
You only gave him karma for the openssl dir.
-Hannes
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> you can now merge your PR and maintain it in ext/openssl.
>
> See the wiki for the howtos about git and PR:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitw
you can now merge your PR and maintain it in ext/openssl.
See the wiki for the howtos about git and PR:
https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitworkflow
https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitfaq
Thanks for your work!
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> pierrejoye
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Run
VCS Account Approved: jas approved by pajoye \o/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
pierrejoye
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
hi Jason,
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Jason Gerfen wrote:
> Pierre Joye suggested that I request an account to help maintain the
> OpenSSL extension as per our discussion on pull request #267.
Please fill http://php.net/git-php.php :-)
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtim
Hi Mike,
Missed your e-mail because it went to the list only.
What you're demonstrating here is functionally equivalent to the simple
example I provided. (The example was intended to show how this feature
works, not necessarily how you would use it in practice.)
The key difference, is that a nat
>
> The only reason being that the syntax "^$user->name" is "more static" than
> new PropertyReference($user, 'name'), and thus easier to refactor?
Not "more static", it is static - a string-based property-reference is not.
Refactoring isn't the only benefit - of course most of the benefits are
Pierre Joye suggested that I request an account to help maintain the
OpenSSL extension as per our discussion on pull request #267.
--
Jas
On May 1, 2013 8:35 AM, "Rasmus Schultz" wrote:
>
> >
> > This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
> > are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed
>
>
> As with anything that isn't already established and well-known, it's hard
This is like building something and
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> >
> > This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
> > are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed
>
>
> As with anything that isn't already established and well-known, it's hard
> to convince anyone they need a
Ola Ferenc,
I'm willing to resurrect the development, how can I do it? Right now
I'm having trouble in making a simple patch applied...
I do have professional reasons for supporting it, one of our major
clients do use MSSQL databases accessed from linux servers, and I
don't see any other fit repl
I know I'm still somewhat of a beginner with OOP, and not at all into
large-scale OOP frameworks (yet!), but I'm really struggling to understand why
the existing & reference operator doesn't suffice for what you are after?
If you could explain in words of as few syllables as possible what you wo
On 1 May 2013 14:55, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> Then why are you not convincing them first to get them on board as support
>> for your proposal.
>
>
> It's not a proposal yet - I didn't want to write a lengthy RFC just to
> learn that all I had was a brainfart, or that everyone was going to be
> tot
>
> Then why are you not convincing them first to get them on board as support
> for your proposal.
It's not a proposal yet - I didn't want to write a lengthy RFC just to
learn that all I had was a brainfart, or that everyone was going to be
totally opposed. Having the discussion here surfaced a
On 1 May 2013 14:35, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> >
> > This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
> > are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed
>
>
> As with anything that isn't already established and well-known, it's hard
> to convince anyone they need anything the
>
> This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
> are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed
As with anything that isn't already established and well-known, it's hard
to convince anyone they need anything they don't understand - I think the
barrier here is me havin
>
> This won't work, because Task::$task is a protected property
It will work for code that's properly documented with @property annotations.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Jannik Zschiesche wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lazare Inepologlou
> Mittwoch, 1. Mai 2013 10:55
> Hello,
>
> 2013/5/1 Stas Malys
Hi,
Lazare Inepologlou
Mittwoch, 1. Mai
2013 10:55
Hello,2013/5/1
Stas Malyshev The
result is the same with "new ReplectionMethod('foo','bar')". The addedvalue
is that it can be statically checked.
well... yes and no.
Take the Symfony2 example:
you want to reference ^$
Hello,
2013/5/1 Stas Malyshev
> Hi!
>
> > In C#, they had the intention to introduce the operator infoof(...) to
> > get the reflection, not only of properties, but of virtually everything
> > in the language. They abandoned the idea because it is really hard to do
> > that for overloaded functi
2013/4/30 Pierre Joye :
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
>>> You may have a lib/object/chunk of code which raises exceptions, because
>>> its developer thought some error is not recoverable; but when you use
>>> it, you don't want to break your program's execution.
27 matches
Mail list logo
