Great points, Adam. I disagree with this one feature being excluded but I
do agree that just because something is in the userland doesn't necessarily
mean it should be in the core-- making my point rather moot.
Cheers.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Adam Harvey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10 January 2013 10:05, Tyler Sommer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Annotations are already a part of PHP. They are widely used in one of the
> > most prolific frameworks, Symfony, and it's ORM "counterpart" Doctrine.
>
> To explain what I meant by "PHP", since I think we're arguing
> semantics there: I mean php-src specifically, rather than the broader
> userland community, since we're on Internals.
>
> > To say "they shouldn't be part of PHP" is fine, but it's too late for
> that.
> > Annotations are already here. Are we going to just ignore this fact and
> hold
> > back what a very significant portion of the community wants to see
> because
> > it conflicts with some ambiguous master plan for PHP?
>
> I don't have a master plan (that would be the part of this thread I'm
> not touching), but if it's a poorly thought out feature, sure. Pretty
> much every major project out there uses a unit testing framework and
> ORM: does that mean we should also be including equivalents for
> PHPUnit and Doctrine in core?
>
> Basically, I think the trend towards configuration as behaviour is an
> antipattern that results in less readable, harder to debug code.
> Having said that, the beauty of our userland being a set of
> communities is that each community can make their own decisions —
> since the good folks behind Doctrine have written an excellent
> annotation parser, those who want to go that way can, but it doesn't
> mean PHP has to go out of its way to encourage it.
>
> Or, to put it another way, not everything has to be a language
> feature. That way lies Perl.
>
> Adam
>