+1 here. I'd love to see the conversation of implementation.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Alec <alecgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I forgot my vote too: +1 > > > On 11/15/2010 9:27 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote: > >> @Zeev: That topic was related to an already built patch, which some >> where in favor, some against. That discussion lead to nowhere. >> So I opened a thread topic by topic for some democracy approval. As >> soon as we reach some reasonable consensus, we can start another patch >> implementation based on what we end up with this thread. >> >> If result of the poll says "OK" to meta attribute, then we can discuss >> next topic (possible implementations). >> Until then, I'd rather appreciate everyone to stick to their votes >> instead of revamp another discussion that lead to nothing. >> >> BTW, I forgot to add my vote: >> >> +1 >> >> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Zeev Suraski<z...@zend.com> wrote: >> >>> I don't see a point in repeating the discussion we've already had on that >>> topic several weeks ago. There needs to be an overwhelmingly good reason to >>> add a brand new syntax to the language, a whole branch of it in the case of >>> annotations - and there simply isn't. >>> >>> Zeev >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: guilhermebla...@gmail.com [mailto:guilhermebla...@gmail.com] >>>> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:08 PM >>>> To: PHP internals >>>> Subject: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 - Meta attribute (aka. Annotations) support >>>> discussion >>>> >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> I'll start a series of topics (in this thread) about meta attribute >>>> (aka. >>>> Annotations) discussion. >>>> So as soon as we agree on each topic I'll open another point to be >>>> discussed. >>>> Only when we reach some consensus I'll open another topic discussion. >>>> I suggest to have a poll for each topic, so we can do some democratic >>>> internals decision. I'd reduce the scope of voters to only people with >>>> PHP >>>> karma. >>>> >>>> The first topic to be defined is: Does PHP need meta attribute support? >>>> >>>> Any language is built at the top of syntax, words, semantics and >>>> context. >>>> We cannot define it as a language if we don't have these 4 parts well >>>> fit >>>> together. >>>> For a simple sentence like: I am all ears, we can easily identify these >>>> parts. >>>> But the real meaning of this sentence (context) is only achieved with >>>> another >>>> part of the language: signifier-significate. >>>> A signifier is an atomic form, material element, visible, sensitive. >>>> A significate is an idea, semantic content, conceptual element, not >>>> sensitive >>>> perceptive. >>>> >>>> This important part is only reminded when we get back to semantics, >>>> specifically when talking about idiomatic expressions, a metaphor in our >>>> sample. The meaning will only work if we have the context, a known >>>> information. Our sentence would mean that spoker person only have ears, >>>> while the true meaning is that he/she is paying attention. >>>> A computer language doesn't differ from a language by any means. We have >>>> tokens (words), a syntax, semantic. But the lack of contextualization >>>> brings a >>>> hole on language and how your application should behave. This behavior >>>> can >>>> be achieved by many different ways; the simplest way is known as meta >>>> information. >>>> >>>> Considering you have a lack of idiomatic expressions knowledge of >>>> someone >>>> that is reading. He'd think person only have ears, but if you meta >>>> notify him >>>> that it is a metaphor, he'd try to find a different meaning. Example: >>>> (Metaphor) I am all ears. >>>> >>>> Now that we find how meta-information can benefit languages, it is time >>>> to >>>> understand how meta-information can benefit a computer language. >>>> >>>> A good example is define a Service that validates Domain Objects. >>>> Imagining a scenario where you have a User class that holds email and >>>> password. Email and password fields must be validated, for example, >>>> email >>>> as an email and password with at least 6 chars. A generic validation >>>> service >>>> could not have the User validation hardcoded inside the service, so the >>>> solution would be an external factor that explains to service how to >>>> validate >>>> the DO. One of the possible implementations would be a UserValidator >>>> class >>>> that contains validation rules for each field. This external factor is a >>>> good >>>> sample of meta-information. But how would a meta attribute would solve >>>> this situation? >>>> A Service could simple retrieve the validation instructions by >>>> Reflecting the >>>> class which instance is going to be validated. >>>> Basically, to validate a Domain Object, it is simply required to add >>>> validation >>>> rules on desired attributes. Example: >>>> >>>> class User { >>>> <Email Meta Information> >>>> protected $email; >>>> >>>> <At least 6 chars Meta Information> >>>> protected $password; >>>> } >>>> >>>> *NOTE*: Please understand that this do not enter in any implementation >>>> details. It is not time (yet) to talk baout docblock, new syntax, etc. >>>> Scope now is simpler than that. >>>> >>>> Now that is possible to see how meta attribute support could benefit a >>>> language, I compiled a simple list of known projects and how can they >>>> benefit of meta support: >>>> - phpUnit Providing meta functionality for test cases, examples: >>>> @dataProvider for test data iteration, @expectedException for catching >>>> exceptions, etc. >>>> - Doctrine For Object-Relational mapping, examples: @Entity, @OneToOne, >>>> @Id, etc. >>>> - Zend Framework Server classes Used to automate mappings for XML-RPC, >>>> SOAP, etc. >>>> - FLOW3 for dependency injection and validation >>>> - Symfony2 for validation and routing rules >>>> - Others: Validation, Functional Behavior injection (which could take >>>> advantage of Traits), etc. >>>> >>>> >>>> Poll will be opened for voting for 7 days (1 week) starting from now. >>>> Poll will be closed next Monday at 5pm GMT. >>>> Question: Does PHP need meta attribute support? >>>> >>>> Happy voting! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Guilherme Blanco >>>> Mobile: +55 (16) 9215-8480 >>>> MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com >>>> São Paulo - SP/Brazil >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, >>>> visit: >>>> http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Thanks, Will Fitch Director of Operations | Quepasa.com 931.205.8242 | will.fi...@quepasacorp.com Twitter: twitter.com/willfitch
