Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf
On 9/15/10 8:13 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >> On 9/15/10 7:13 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ra

Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread J Ravi Menon
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 9/15/10 7:13 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >  So my guess is, if we do php-

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: More formal feature request cycle

2010-09-15 Thread John Coggeshall
Formality, in any of its forms, is about as far from PHP or this project as you could possibly get. John On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Alec wrote: > This could be good. A custom built site where people can vote for and > against (and maybe neutral) something and then post their reasoning. >

[PHP-DEV] Re: More formal feature request cycle

2010-09-15 Thread Alec
This could be good. A custom built site where people can vote for and against (and maybe neutral) something and then post their reasoning. Open discussion could still take place on internals, but a site that would provide a quick summary would be handy. So RFC wiki page + user registration tie

Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf
On 9/15/10 7:13 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >>> On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ravi Menon wrote: So my guess is, if we do php-fpm approach, we have to do all these cleanups manually?

Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread J Ravi Menon
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, J Ravi Menon wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >> On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >>>  So my guess is, if we do php-fpm approach, we have to do all these >>> cleanups manually?  Or are there simpler solutions or hook-ups th

[PHP-DEV] More formal feature request cycle

2010-09-15 Thread James Butler
This thought is brought on mainly by watching the annotations drama that is currently occupying internals, does anyone else agree it might be a good idea to have a slightly more formal procedure for requesting features and then recording votes pros, cons, side effects, etc. against it. It might

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Alec
Gustavo's message pretty much expresses exactly how I feel. As an extension, I feel that as long as annotations don't slow down existing non-annotated code (or code using the ridiculous phpdoc parsing), then I see no reason to keep annotations from being added. People argue that the new synta

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Gustavo Lopes
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:00:15 +0100, Stas Malyshev wrote: easy as possible for the sooner. In the case of the annotation, the kids writing their websites won't use them, the learning curve remains unchanged. No, because they look at the framework code and when they see all this {...@#!blah

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Stas Malyshev
Hi! easy as possible for the sooner. In the case of the annotation, the kids writing their websites won't use them, the learning curve remains unchanged. No, because they look at the framework code and when they see all this {...@#!blah($...@blah=blah$^)]} they'd have hard time figuring out w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Pierre Joye
hi Stas, On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > PHP is meant for different audience than C# or Java. PHP is an entry-level > language. If you have same learning curve for PHP as they have for Java, > what we are doing here? Just adding $'s to variables? There should be a > diffe

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Arvids Godjuks
Hi all. As a user land developer and active reader (and some times poster) for a few years now this is the first time I trully don't understand what the hell are you talking about and what are annotations at all and what will be the usage of them in the PHP. And for what? Building 2-3 frameworks a

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Jonathan Bond-Caron
On Wed Sep 15 12:17 PM, Guilherme Blanco wrote: > I think meta programming is not and would never be part of comment. > As previously said, docblock means documentation, without any meaning > to parser, entirely human readable and totally removable without > affecting overall execution. I have t

Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread J Ravi Menon
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ravi Menon wrote: >>  So my guess is, if we do php-fpm approach, we have to do all these >> cleanups manually?  Or are there simpler solutions or hook-ups that >> does it automatically at the end of the request cycle?

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Gustavo Lopes
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 07:55:55 +0100, Zeev Suraski wrote: At 08:09 15/09/2010, Stas Malyshev wrote: Phpdocs aren't "user documentation" only, not for a long time (I mean the concept, not the particular application called phpDocumentor, of course). They are being used as metadata in many place

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Stas Malyshev
Hi! 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. I wouldn't call it "in a hurry"

Re: [PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf
On 9/15/10 10:57 AM, J Ravi Menon wrote: > So my guess is, if we do php-fpm approach, we have to do all these > cleanups manually? Or are there simpler solutions or hook-ups that > does it automatically at the end of the request cycle? No, fastcgi doesn't change this model at all. You have the

[PHP-DEV] nginx+php-fpm question

2010-09-15 Thread J Ravi Menon
Hi, [Note: I am new to this list and I don't actively work on php internals. I have been occasionally glancing at some php internals here n there for interest and better understanding.] I raised this question on php-general and was recommended to try out the internals list: (tried to search the a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Chad Fulton
Since the parsed version of the docblock would only be accessible through a reflection method, you would have to specifically request it for it to be parsed and given to you as an object or array. Also, it would only be parsed, not executed; I don't think that this is proposing executing comment bl

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread James Butler
I might be wading into this a bit fast but At a very simple level, comments are not meant to be parsed by design. Hence commenting out code so it is not parsed! How would one tell the parser not to read docblock annotations as there wouldn't be a mechanism to comment them out? Lots of peopl

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Guilherme Blanco
It's curious that you keep complaining about new syntax and propose a new one at the same time. [Foo] introduces new concept, use /** @Foo */ or /** [Foo] */ instead. What's the point then? I think meta programming is not and would never be part of comment. As previously said, docblock means doc

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Lars Schultz
listen to this man;) I think he's on to something. I don't see any problem with that aproach and both parties would be satisfied, no? Am 15.09.2010 10:45, schrieb Benjamin Eberlei: Hi Zeev and Stas, I wouldnt mind extending doc block metadata support instead of adding a new syntax. I ag

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Christian Kaps
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:46:45 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: > The only difference in PHP is the complete lack of clear road map and > the chaotic way of deciding things. Yes, I personally see here a huge problem too. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: ht

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Christian Kaps
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:12:43 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 09:37 15/09/2010, Christian Kaps wrote: >>On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:09:02 -0700, Stas Malyshev >> wrote: >> >> > Whatever syntax it is, it is definitely new. >> >>Yes, but this should not be an argument against it. So every new >>feature ca

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Pierre Joye
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Zeev Suraski 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

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Benjamin Eberlei
Hi Zeev and Stas, I wouldnt mind extending doc block metadata support instead of adding a new syntax. I agree with you that PHP Docs allow metadata and they can be used for that (and some people do, including me), however what the annotation patch + rfc tries to achieve is something going

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
At 09:37 15/09/2010, Christian Kaps wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:09:02 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Whatever syntax it is, it is definitely new. Yes, but this should not be an argument against it. So every new feature can have new syntax or should PHP freeze on the current state!? I can't ho

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Stas Malyshev
Hi! - Annotations are like enum fields, or a function headers. You can only specify these values defined by the annotation. In normal data structures like arrays you can define what you will. This is irrelevant for PHP as it's not compiled. So the check would happen in runtime, how does it ma

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Pierre Joye
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I think great frameworks can be created in PHP w/o annotations (there are > numerous live examples attesting to that) - and the bang/buck of introducing > this whole new concept and the associated complexity to everyone is not > high. To quo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Christian Kaps
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:09:02 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Whatever syntax it is, it is definitely new. Yes, but this should not be an argument against it. So every new feature can have new syntax or should PHP freeze on the current state!? I can't honestly understand why developer shouldn't un

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Re: PHP Annotations RFC + Patch

2010-09-15 Thread Christian Kaps
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:09:02 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> class User { >> >> [NotNull] >> [Integer] >> public $id; >> >> [NotNull] >> [Regexp('/[a-z]*/i')] >> [MinLength(2)] >> [MaxLength(255)] >> public $name; >> >> [NotNull] >> [Zipcod