On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote:
> In terms of language-level features, I don't think it's bad at all if PHP > went into a mode that most of the other mature languages went into - where > syntax changes or introduction of new language level features are pretty > rare. Out of all of the mature languages out there, I think PHP has by far > the most new syntax-introducing features per version, and personally I don't > think that's a good thing. Most of the new features should come from new > extensions, new libraries and frameworks - not syntax changes. Annotations went into the language level for other languages as well. However I agree about the syntax issues, but the problem is the total lack of clean roadmap and designs more than features additions like this one. The way we decided the NS separator was typically one of these bad choices, made in a hurry without consensus. It is also correct that new features should come through extension. But languages level features should be done at the engine level. Annotation support is a language level feature. It is also critical to understand the evolution of the languages, where new languages features are required to move forward. What we introduced (or plan to) lately are very good things, like closure or traits (to be committed?). And I don't see a huge difference in language syntax addition or core features addition between PHP and other languages, looking at php3 > 5+ or C# and java various features in the same timeline. The only difference in PHP is the complete lack of clear road map and the chaotic way of deciding things. I also see a kind of interest conflict of interests in your case while promoting (a) framework(s) instead of updating the core to match the current level of features of other languages. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
