Am 11.05.2011 00:28, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com:
- Entities with knowledge about its persistence information
That must be something I simply have no knowledge about. But isn't it
just a theoretical difference, because in practice, the code being
annotations or PHP-Code is kept within
Hi,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
So, please stop saying no to every feature request that comes in and
start to discuss the actual impact of each feature.
I think that MY only problem with you 'adding annotations
Am 10.05.2011 16:53, schrieb Martin Scotta:
Annotations are not required, you add them if you want to.
Yes. sure. But I am sure that certain Annotations must be combined to
unleash their purpose, no? There is no validation for that, correct?
Also they can be used not only with classes. You
dukeofgaming wrote:
So, please stop saying no to every feature request that comes
in and
start to discuss the actual impact of each feature.
I think that MY only problem with you 'adding annotations because it
is missing' is simply that I've already been doing
This is another thing that troubles me when I read this list. How does the
PHP core dev community sets priorities?, is there some sort of roadmap?, is
there a process to create this roadmap?, or is it just all a generalized
best intention to do things.
I'm aware that the more features the
On 05/10/2011 01:04 PM, Stefan Marr wrote:
The whole thing required a lot of, what I would characterize as,
hand-holding. Internals is not the most open community and needs not
only good arguments, but persistence. And, well, it also seem to
require to get in touch with the right people...
And
Am 11.05.2011 09:35, schrieb dukeofgaming:
Que?. Are you aware that you cannot implement interface methods?.
Sorry. my bad. I mixed implementation with specification, but it would
work, no?
I really think the dilemma of whether annotations are useful or not is
moot.
What an argument. I'm not
Maintaining and improving the PHP website
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Lars Schultz wrote:
Also citings of .NET and Java makes me wanna scream, because I don't
want those languages. I want PHP, which has been my faithful servant for
over 12 years!
Mine not quite so long, but exactly ...
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact -
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Lars Schultz lars.schu...@toolpark.comwrote:
Am 11.05.2011 09:35, schrieb dukeofgaming:
Que?. Are you aware that you cannot implement interface methods?.
Sorry. my bad. I mixed implementation with specification, but it would
work, no?
Eh, well, in a weird
Am 11.05.2011 10:11, schrieb dukeofgaming:
Eh, well, in a weird and complex way I'd guess =P.
I am saying that using interfaces in situations where you need more than
key = value annotations or state (is that correct?) are of similar
complexity and already available.
Also, and if I'm not
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
The roadmap is in the form of a feature list which you can find at
http://wiki.php.net/etcwiki.php.net/etc
There is never going to be complete agreement on any feature, but once
there is enough agreement from the main
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 03:39 -0500, dukeofgaming wrote:
In other words, the ideal situation to move this particular case forward is
to have more stakeholders join the discussion, right?. An issue that I see
here is that it is not that easy to join in the discussion because:
a) They would need
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote:
On 05/10/2011 01:04 PM, Stefan Marr wrote:
The whole thing required a lot of, what I would characterize as,
hand-holding. Internals is not the most open community and needs not
only good arguments, but persistence. And,
dukeofgaming wrote:
c) The public mirror of the newsgroup is faulty, see
http://news.php.net/php.internals/52242 for example
/command too long: XPATH 4dc826b1.4090...@lerdorf.com
mailto:4dc826b1.4090...@lerdorf.com 4dc82a36.8090...@lerdorf.com
mailto:4dc82a36.8090...@lerdorf.com
On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
https://wiki.php.net/todo
That was supposed to be wiki.php.net/rfc (iPad auto-correct messed it up)
In other words, the ideal situation to move this particular case forward
is to have more
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 10:21 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
dukeofgaming wrote:
c) The public mirror of the newsgroup is faulty, see
http://news.php.net/php.internals/52242 for example
/command too long: XPATH 4dc826b1.4090...@lerdorf.com
mailto:4dc826b1.4090...@lerdorf.com
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:30 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
https://wiki.php.net/todo
That was supposed to be wiki.php.net/rfc (iPad auto-correct messed it up)
I see. I have
Johannes Schlüter wrote:
I've got in the habit of killing all the extra reply addresses myself!
Which is bad, as it means that I don't get a reply to the sub-thread I'm
interested in (as i participated) to my inbox, but only in my internals
folder, where it easily disappears in a long thread.
On 11/05/11 2:33 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On May 10, 2011, at 21:01, Gabriel Sosasosagabr...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm basically using lynx to convert some html into plain text
basically replicating the following command:
*lynx -pseudo_inlines=off -hiddenlinks=merge -reload -cache=0 -notitle
On 11 May 2011 07:50, dukeofgaming dukeofgam...@gmail.com wrote:
It is really troubling to read that statement. Seems there are still some
that don't really have a clue of what annotations are, even when the RFC
clearly links to them. Annotations ARE NOT documentation; in the case of
PHP,
Am 11.05.2011 13:31, schrieb Richard Quadling:
On 11 May 2011 07:50, dukeofgaming dukeofgam...@gmail.com wrote:
It is really troubling to read that statement. Seems there are still some
that don't really have a clue of what annotations are, even when the RFC
clearly links to them. Annotations
On 11 May 2011 18:07, Christian Kaps christian.k...@mohiva.com wrote:
Why not learning from Java and implement annotations in the way
Guilherme proposed it? I think they had good reasons for the new
implementation. Maybe someone has a link which points to such discussion.
I believe you are
On 05/10/2011 10:03 PM, Chad Fulton wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:35 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Based on an extensive chat with Matthew, I think we reached some consensus.
I'll write another RFC related to Annotations in docblocks, then we
can
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Mike van Riel mike.vanr...@naenius.comwrote:
On 05/10/2011 10:03 PM, Chad Fulton wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:35 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Based on an extensive chat with Matthew, I think we reached some
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
as phpDocumentor is dead and doesn't support new things like namespace and
closures, we should take those into account also.
Nothing stops it from working perfectly well on the years of code that it still
supports! Finding people with the time to ADD new features is the
On 05/11/2011 03:18 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
as phpDocumentor is dead and doesn't support new things like
namespace and
closures, we should take those into account also.
Nothing stops it from working perfectly well on the years of code that
it still supports! Finding
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Mike van Riel mike.vanr...@naenius.comwrote:
On 05/11/2011 03:18 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
as phpDocumentor is dead and doesn't support new things like namespace
and
closures, we should take those into account also.
Nothing stops it
Mike van Riel wrote:
DocBlox (http://www.docblox-project.org) is a rising project which
offers support for all these new things and uses less processing time
and memory.
It is goal is to serve as an alternative for phpDocumentor (and an
improvement, it has several features of it's own such as
On 2011-05-11, dukeofgaming dukeofgam...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
So, please stop saying no to every feature request that comes in
and start to discuss the actual impact of each feature.
On 2011-05-11, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Mike van Riel wrote:
DocBlox (http://www.docblox-project.org) is a rising project which
offers support for all these new things and uses less processing time
and memory.
It is goal is to serve as an alternative for phpDocumentor (and
On May 11, 2011, at 4:00 AM, dukeofgaming dukeofgam...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:30 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
https://wiki.php.net/todo
That was
Hi Larz,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Lars Schultz lars.schu...@toolpark.com wrote:
Am 10.05.2011 16:53, schrieb Martin Scotta:
Annotations are not required, you add them if you want to.
Yes. sure. But I am sure that certain Annotations must be combined to
unleash their purpose, no?
Hi Lester,
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
sorry my FUD counter just overflowed with your last comment.
Sorry you feel that way, but obviously there are more people with my view
that we simply do not agree on IF annotation should
Hi Rasmus,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
https://wiki.php.net/todo
That was supposed to be wiki.php.net/rfc (iPad auto-correct messed it up)
In
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
PDO is another case in point - that is still not accepted and fully
functional as a replacement for the genric drivers ... ADOdb still provides
a valid abstraction layer, and if you must use PDO then it just loads that
instead of the generic one ... and it
On 05/11/2011 09:21 AM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
The only point that I see here is that none of them heavily rely on
this feature.
Doctrine/Symfony relies a lot on it, and requires special treatment
that key = value support is not enough.
Please check out these pages for reference:
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Lester,
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Lester Caineles...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
sorry my FUD counter just overflowed with your last comment.
Sorry you feel that way, but obviously there are more people with my view
that we simply do
Well, maybe it's time to make some decisions and start to spin the wheels?
I's quite obvious that annotations are out for next release until they are a
docbook/phpDoc style. Personally I do not understand the concept fully, but
my vote will definetly go to the docbook/phpdoc variant. Adding a
Hi Larz,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Lars Schultz lars.schu...@toolpark.com wrote:
Am 11.05.2011 00:28, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com:
- Entities with knowledge about its persistence information
That must be something I simply have no knowledge about. But isn't it just a
-Original Message-
From: Stas Malyshev [mailto:smalys...@sugarcrm.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 4:41 PM
To: PHP Internals
Subject: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 again
Hi!
I would like to propose the following process (of course, dates can be moved
around, etc. - I consider phase lengths be more
I think an idea of an alpha right away is a good one. I feel we
definitely have enough stuff in HEAD branch right now for 5.4 +/-
few minor changes. It should also be a good boost to getting people on
track that 5.4 is a go.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Andi Gutmans a...@zend.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 18:03 +, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Stas, in the past we had alphas. Is there any reason why we wouldn't
roll one out asap? (revert the typehints stuff and go).
+1
johannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:
On May 11, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 18:03 +, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Stas, in the past we had alphas. Is there any reason why we wouldn't
roll one out asap? (revert the typehints stuff and go).
+1
Waiting a month or two longer is worth it,
Martin Scotta
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
Well, maybe it's time to make some decisions and start to spin the wheels?
I's quite obvious that annotations are out for next release until they are
a
docbook/phpDoc style. Personally I do not
Hi!
Stas, in the past we had alphas. Is there any reason why we wouldn't
roll one out asap? (revert the typehints stuff and go).
OK, I can do the stuff (typehints, branch, tag) on the weekend. I don't
know how to roll the packages do the mails though, so if somebody
could volunteer there
Hi!
Waiting a month or two longer is worth it, especially considering the
5.4 momentum feels real this time around. We're creating a real TODO,
and have a real tentative timeline, so forcing a premature alpha at
this point (thus closing off feature/api discussion) is a bad idea. A
big -1 here.
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 11:43 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Stas, in the past we had alphas. Is there any reason why we wouldn't
roll one out asap? (revert the typehints stuff and go).
OK, I can do the stuff (typehints, branch, tag) on the weekend. I don't
know how to roll the
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
My main concern is the trickle-down effect a major low-level engine
addition causes. Your patch is just the tip of the iceberg which will cause
dozens of people weeks of work to account for the new code all across the
Hi!
Most parts (all?) is documented in README.RELEASE_PROCESS I can assist.
Thanks!
Interestingly enough, this file still refers to CVS in trunk. I guess
somebody familiar with up-to-date process has to update it :)
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM:
Hi!
Most parts (all?) is documented in README.RELEASE_PROCESS I can assist.
Thanks!
Interestingly enough, this file still refers to CVS in trunk. I guess
somebody familiar with up-to-date process has to update it :)
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM:
On 05/11/2011 02:52 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
as phpDocumentor is dead and doesn't support new things like namespace and
closures, we should take those into account also.
Next generation documentation tools such as phpdox [1] handle these
newer language features just fine.
--
[1]
On 05/11/2011 08:20 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
+1
+1
--
Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:
On 05/11/2011 05:32 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
ZF docs were taking between 80 and 110 minutes with phpDocumentor, and
consuming ~2GB of RAM. They now take around 10 minutes and consume less
than 1GB of RAM. :)
phpdox generates documentation for Zend Framework in less than two
minutes
On 05/11/2011 11:01 PM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
phpdox generates documentation for Zend Framework in less than two
minutes using less than 50 megabytes of memory ;-)
I forgot to mention that the above is for a run without an existing
cache. With an existing cache it is 5 seconds and 5
On May 11, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Waiting a month or two longer is worth it, especially considering the
5.4 momentum feels real this time around. We're creating a real TODO,
and have a real tentative timeline, so forcing a premature alpha at
this point (thus closing
On 05/11/2011 11:05 PM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
On 05/11/2011 11:01 PM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
phpdox generates documentation for Zend Framework in less than two
minutes using less than 50 megabytes of memory ;-)
I forgot to mention that the above is for a run without an existing
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Larz,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Lars Schultz lars.schu...@toolpark.com
wrote:
Am 11.05.2011 00:28, schrieb guilhermebla...@gmail.com:
- Entities with knowledge about its persistence
On 05/11/2011 02:10 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
So, that's the concern there. But if the alpha is simply a trick to convince
people to test out a specific PHP 5.4 snapshot, and feel 5.4 is real, then do
it. ;)
There are still quite a few test failures in trunk. Some of them are
also in the 5_3
Hi duke,
I moved it to rejected in pro of a new proposal.
I briefly drafted it here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations-in-docblock
There's a lot of things to be officially defined, but basic idea is there.
I expect to have a chat with interested core devs to see what can be
done in this
is there any chance to add docblocks to arguments in methods and
global functions so annotations can be used for them? i.e:
public function aMethod(/** @Validate */ UserData $data) {
...
}
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:57 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi duke,
I
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:57 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi duke,
I moved it to rejected in pro of a new proposal.
I briefly drafted it here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations-in-docblock
There's a lot of things to be officially defined, but basic
@duke: Exactly.
The idea is to expose this support through Reflection API
@Marcelo: It is listed that this support would be necessary.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:06 PM, dukeofgaming dukeofgam...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:57 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
Hi:
On 11 May 2011, at 23:10, Philip Olson wrote:
On May 11, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
The alpha release proposal by Andi contains the text:
I think we (almost) all agree that we need to start pushing PHP 5.4 with
all the goodness that has been developed to-date.
On May 11, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 05/11/2011 02:10 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
So, that's the concern there. But if the alpha is simply a trick to convince
people to test out a specific PHP 5.4 snapshot, and feel 5.4 is real, then
do it. ;)
There are still quite a few
Hi!
We once had a matrix showing test results per setup (OS, phpversion,
per configure switches) but it was someones pet project and the code
has long since been lost (he looked years ago). Maybe such a beast
would be useful.
We can do a table saying which tests fails where in the wiki right
On 11.05.2011 23:57, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi duke,
I moved it to rejected in pro of a new proposal.
I briefly drafted it here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations-in-docblock
There's a lot of things to be officially defined, but basic idea is there.
I expect to have a chat
67 matches
Mail list logo
