On Fri Sep 17 01:06 PM, Guilherme Blanco wrote: > > Another good example is to map your persistence data into your > Entities. Doctrine 2 implements this and I think that way you can > compare easily with the PHP code alternative. I'd like to ask you to > compate the same Entity mapped through Annotations emulator and using > raw PHP code: > CmsUser using Annotations: > http://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/blob/master/tests/Doctrine/Tests/ > M > odels/CMS/CmsUser.php > CmsUser using PHP code: > http://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/blob/master/tests/Doctrine/Tests/ > O RM/Mapping/php/Doctrine.Tests.ORM.Mapping.User.php >
You're basically bundling (M: Model, data & configuration, C: Control, business logic / code) into a single class while the MVC pattern is all about separating M,V and C. What's wrong with a simple configuration file? Caching the parsed config in shared memory? One important flaw rarely mentioned with annotations config: your code now depends on framework X to read the annotations instead of a simple configuration file (.xml, .ini., ...) Sorry if I might sound harsh but configuration through annotations is terrible. You'll find many .net or java developers that agree, I'd say it's 50-50 if not more 70-30. Does this discussion still belong in internals? We could argue about this for months, java astronauts don't even agree how annotations are useful: http://www.javaworld.com/community/node/2613 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
