> From the perspective of providing reflection in general and > giving something for editors with code completion to use in > specific, would there be an interrest in backfilling the > arg_info structs for internal functions (both core and > otherwise) with argument naming and type hinting even where > it's not technically needed? > > On the con side, this does add memory usage and processing > time for no direct production benefit. Any utility which > wanted this degree of introspection *could* parse the XML > protos in phpdoc and get the same (or > better) information, so it doesn't really gain that much for > what it costs.
Can you produce the arg_info structs from parsing the XML protos? > > Do please forget about the work required to fill in this > information. There are more than enough volunteers to do the > grunge work(and frankly it'd be tough for 'em to get it > horribly wrong), this is just a question of: "Would there be > an interrest in folding this data into the core?" and secondly: > "Should new extension writers be encouraged to fill this > information in?". Perhaps some tool to generate boiler plate docbook from introspection would be enough encouragement? Jared -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
