On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Ralf Lang <l...@b1-systems.de> wrote:
> Am 11.01.2013 05:55, schrieb dukeofgaming: > > I have a question, maybe it is dumb: why not those opposed to using > > annotations just... refrain from using them? > > > > Although I am not the least against annotations, there are valid and > good technical reasons why one does not want to have a feature in the > language. > > As Rasmus said, the code for annotations also needs to interface with > opcode caches and other core and close-to-core technologies. This will > require additional development and maint. time/manpower. This is a > finite resource, there is a tradeoff between expensive new language > features like annotations and other stuff which needs to be done. You > can probably not have both at the same time. > I understand, those arguments make sense. Wouldn't it be good to just document these sort of blockers in the RFC without rejecting the proposal?, who knows, someone can come and have a solution for each one of these in one form or other. > > > Finally, I remember the lack of support for development has been a > > problem... so why not call out for support to the community?, from GSoC > to > > PHP gurus litterate on Comp Sci and software engineering and > architecture? > > I think this has been done before and most who stay and contribute over > time have come here by their own means. > By the way, even if it is not to work on a particular features, maybe call for more help on maintenance? > > -- > Ralf Lang > Linux Consultant / Developer > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
