Now that's something we can agree on :D

We can reduce the syntax added to simply being the attribute tag before
the standard syntax for a function call/class creation.

This means functions can be attributes too (as if that is useful...)!

This is a function being used as an attribute

attribute functionAttr("test")
public function Test() {

or a class

attribute new ClassAttr("Test")
public function Test() {

Does that lower the syntax bar enough?

On 11/17/2010 4:12 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I’m not the only one in this thread repeating himself to make a point :)

What I opposed is the notion that ‘everyone wants some sort of meta attribute support’. Maybe I read too much into it but I read it as implying we need something substantial that’s new.

Either way, I’m fine with going in this way as long as the high-level-direction of not adding a large amount of syntax is clear.


you said that before.
and this is where the discussion started about the alternative syntax and implementation.
you said, that you see the usefulness, you just don't think that it worths the complexity and the new syntax.
if that so, then I can't see, why can't we move on from the why is this useful to the how and what should we implement.
in the end, it would only gets in to the trunk if the prominent coredevs(as you, Rasmus, etc.) accept it, so I don't know why are you afraid continuing the discussion about this feature.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase