At 11:25 AM 4/28/2005 +0100, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 10:16 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 03:28 PM 4/27/2005 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >At 20:12 25/04/2005, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>[snip]
> >>But then again I think the whole thing is typical OO bloat anyway and
> >
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 10:16 pm, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 03:28 PM 4/27/2005 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >At 20:12 25/04/2005, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>[snip]
> >>But then again I think the whole thing is typical OO bloat anyway and
> >>that's why I don't want to have language features a
At 03:28 PM 4/27/2005 +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 20:12 25/04/2005, Christian Schneider wrote:
[snip]
But then again I think the whole thing is typical OO bloat anyway and
that's why I don't want to have language features added for it (-:C
I wholeheartedly agree.
So do I. If you really need such
At 17:44 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
Hmm. As I mentioned to Christian in a private email, I have a system which is
350K LOC. Now not all of that gets loaded at one time of course (thank God
for __autoload()!), but there are times when a significant proportion of it
is loaded. And then it mun
Hi,
Duncan McIntyre wrote:
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 2:19 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 16:58 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
I remember similar arguments being made about most of the new OO features
in PHP5.
Out of interest, how is this more bloated than storing doc comments in
memory?
It's feat
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 April 2005 2:19 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > At 16:58 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
> > >I remember similar arguments being made about most of the new OO features
> > >in PHP5.
> > >
> > >Out of interest, how is this more bloated th
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 2:19 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:58 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
> >I remember similar arguments being made about most of the new OO features
> >in PHP5.
> >
> >Out of interest, how is this more bloated than storing doc comments in
> > memory?
>
> It's feature b
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 2:19 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:58 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
> >I remember similar arguments being made about most of the new OO features
> >in PHP5.
> >
> >Out of interest, how is this more bloated than storing doc comments in
> > memory?
>
> It's feature b
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I'm not too thrilled about this deal. I don't think I'd be in favour of
> accepting this attributes patch regardless of just about anything else. Not
> sure how others feel about it, but at least in my opinion, this feature is a
> clear 'no no' for PHP.
At 16:58 27/04/2005, Duncan McIntyre wrote:
I remember similar arguments being made about most of the new OO features
in PHP5.
Out of interest, how is this more bloated than storing doc comments in memory?
It's feature bloat, not memory consumption bloat. Adding obscure operators
is the worst t
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 1:28 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 20:12 25/04/2005, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >[snip]
> >But then again I think the whole thing is typical OO bloat anyway and
> >that's why I don't want to have language features added for it (-:C
>
> I wholeheartedly agree.
>
> Zeev
I
At 20:12 25/04/2005, Christian Schneider wrote:
[snip]
But then again I think the whole thing is typical OO bloat anyway and
that's why I don't want to have language features added for it (-:C
I wholeheartedly agree.
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visi
Duncan McIntyre wrote:
> Sebastian - how's the parser going?
Have a look at
http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=237
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69
--
PHP
Duncan McIntyre wrote:
It's different because in your example there is no way of knowing that
$AllowableValues refers to $WidgetType.
My solution would be
var $attributes = array(
'accountType' => array(
'Type' => "Select",
'
It's different because in your example there is no way of knowing that
$AllowableValues refers to $WidgetType.
You would have to explicitly code that relationship into every class which
needed to know it.
On Monday 25 April 2005 5:28 pm, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Duncan McIntyre wrote:
>
Duncan McIntyre wrote:
http://www.calligram.co.uk/oss/Attributes
In your example I fail to see how
@[ WidgetType("Select");
AllowableValues(array("Current","Savings")); ]
is different from the good old
var $WidgetType = "Select", $AllowableValues = array("Current", "Saving");
apart from look
> http://www.calligram.co.uk/oss/Attributes
Whew Duncan! That's *VERY* nice.
Anyways... Annotations (structured comments) vs. Attributes?
Here's my take:
Since annotations are comments, you can remove them without modifying
behavior. However, attributes are actually *needed* since they are
part
Sebastian - how's the parser going?
I've finished my patches to make attributes work as native PHP tokens.
You can get the code and read a discussion about the various possibilities for
implementation at
http://www.calligram.co.uk/oss/Attributes
I really hope we can come to a consensus on how
18 matches
Mail list logo
