[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       php-internals
Subject:    RE: [PHP-DEV] On how a little knowledge is completely useless.
From:       "Jonathan Bond-Caron" <jbondc () openmv ! com>
Date:       2010-09-19 16:05:05
Message-ID: 001501cb5814$6d797e20$486c7a60$ () com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri Sep 17 03:13 PM, Ralph Schindler wrote:
> Inline response:
> 
> On 9/17/10 1:57 PM, Jonathan Bond-Caron wrote:
> > On Fri Sep 17 01:06 PM, Guilherme Blanco wrote:
> > > 
> > > Another good example is to map your persistence data into your 
> > > Entities. Doctrine 2 implements this and I think that way you can 
> > > compare easily with the PHP code alternative. I'd like to ask you 
> > > to compate the same Entity mapped through Annotations emulator and
> using
> > > raw PHP code:
> > > CmsUser using Annotations:
> > > 
> http://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/blob/master/tests/Doctrine/Tests
> > > /
> > > M
> > > odels/CMS/CmsUser.php
> > > CmsUser using PHP code:
> > > 
> http://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/blob/master/tests/Doctrine/Tests
> > > / O RM/Mapping/php/Doctrine.Tests.ORM.Mapping.User.php
> > > 
> > 
> > You're basically bundling (M: Model, data&  configuration, C:
> Control, business logic / code) into a single class while the MVC 
> pattern is all about separating M,V and C.
> 
> Jonathan, I think you are misinterpreting this code.  There is no 
> Controller (Front controller, or parameter mapping from $_POST or
> $_GET) nor View responsibilities (echo) here.  These are all Model
> concerns:

I'm not talking about "web mvc" and mapping urls to controllers. 
There's another pattern where you have a controller (php class) and a data model (sql \
schema, .xsd, ...) 

Problem statement: How do I map class properties to a given data model (sql schema, \
.xsd, ...)?

Some believe (strong opinions) that using annotations to do this is not a "good \
example", though abundant usage in java.

It would better serve the discussion if "good" and "bad" was left out and if \
annotations were presented and promoted in a more neutral way.

If we take a more fun example, how is a swiss army knife useful?

- It can be used to open cans of food.
- It can be used to cut hair.
- It can be used to shave in the morning.
...

I have full faith in the ability of core developers to make their own opinions on how \
annotations can be useful to the php community at large. There are more things to be \
considered then technical arguments.

The bigger emerging problem is the complete lack of "formal process" to propose \
changes to php's syntax: a) How to write a proposal to be accepted for review
b) How and by who the proposal will be reviewed
c) Who makes the final decision (e.g. executive committee) to approve or reject a \
proposal.

Going back to annotations, the discussions seems to be bouncing from (a) to (c) while \
it seems like we are still at (a).

I've been following internals only for the past couple of years and I don't know \
enough the history but it seems like it would be time to write a document that \
defines a "formal process" to propose syntax changes (Zend/zend_language_parser.y, \
...?) 

I'm more than willing to start writing a draft, e.g. a much simplified version of:
http://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2

Is this worth a try? 


-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]