I think this RFC syntax is outdated. We can remove the whole new syntax and
just make everything between <> php code that returns the last statement
because of the array short syntax this ends up to be stuff like:
<['foo' => bar']>
<['foo' => foo()]>
<['foo' => new Foo('bar')]>
This would greatly simplify the feature, because then its just PHP code and
everybody allready knows that.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Clint Priest <cpri...@zerocue.com> wrote:
> Just starting a new thread here to discuss true annotations vs a DocBlock
> Parser:
>
> RFC Referenced:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**annotations<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations>
>
>
> On 1/9/2013 2:09 AM, Peter Cowburn wrote:
>
>> On 9 January 2013 01:08, Rasmus Schultz <ras...@mindplay.dk> wrote:
>>
>>> I've started working on a new proposal, but I'm getting hung up on the
>>> syntax - if we can't use angle brackets anymore, what can we use?
>>> Virtually
>>> every symbol on a standard US keyword is an operator of some sort, does
>>> that mean those are all out of the question?
>>>
>>> e.g. thinking of concrete possible basic syntax, neither of the following
>>> delimiters would work:
>>>
>>> [Foo('bar')]
>>>
>> Why would this not work? I'm struggling to think of a place where one
>> would want to use an annotation where it could be misinterpreted as an
>> array literal. If anything, the visual "conflict" or association with
>> the array syntax is a good thing in my book: my brain parses it as an
>> array of one or more annotations.
>>
> I agree here, I think the above, if possible would be best. In my mind
> annotations should proabably be limited in scope to class declarations and
> thus only before a class keyword, before a property or method declaration.
>
> In none of those scopes would [ ] be a parsing issue I believe...
>
> The one case would be at the beginning of a class, but if simply added
> something such as:
> [:SomeAttribute(xyz,abc),**SomeAttribute2]
>
> It could never be confused with short array syntax and is still brief.
>
> --
> -Clint
>
