Hey:
There are some PRs for supports of PowerPC64
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/734
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/735
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/736
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/737
Anyone can review them?
or, I will commit the patches by
Hi Nikita,
I think RFC misses few important notes about behavior changes:
1) The behavior of $a-$b[$c] is changed. PHP apps that used such syntax
have to be changed into $a-{$b[$c]}.
2) The evaluation order of left and right parts of assignment is changed.
$a[$i++] = $a[$i++]; It wasn't
Am 18.08.2014 um 09:32 schrieb Dmitry Stogov:
Can OPcahce always keep AST in shared memory and don't copy it into
process memory on each request? (ext/opcache/zend_accelerator_util_funcs.c)
Why would the AST need to be cached?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote:
Am 18.08.2014 um 09:32 schrieb Dmitry Stogov:
Can OPcahce always keep AST in shared memory and don't copy it into
process memory on each request? (ext/opcache/zend_accelerator_util_funcs.c)
Why would the AST need to
Am 18.08.2014 um 10:01 schrieb Pierre Joye:
I can imagine optimizations happening during the cache lifetime and
not only right on the 1st request/compilation. Having the AST at hand
can be handy.
That makes sense.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe,
constant expressions for properties, etc.
class Foo {
public $x = 5 + SOME_CONST;
}
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net
wrote:
Am 18.08.2014 um 09:32 schrieb Dmitry Stogov:
Can OPcahce always keep AST in shared memory and don't copy it
Hi!
There are some PRs for supports of PowerPC64
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/734
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/735
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/736
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/737
Anyone can review them?
or, I will commit the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 18/08/2014 08:10, Laruence a écrit :
Hey:
There are some PRs for supports of PowerPC64
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/734
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/735
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/736
Hi!
Quick test build (using fedora 5.6.0RC4 package on RHEL-7...)
(notice, report will be clean in a few days)
Thanks a lot, Remi! Looks like something is not right with these patches
Without the patches
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9765/7399765/build.log
Number
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 18/08/2014 11:21, Stas Malyshev a écrit :
BTW, it'd be nice to figure out why we have 6 fails there :)
I already spent a lot of time fixing various non-intel failed tests...
3 related to date can be ignored (because of fedora / red hat
On 18 August 2014 03:37, Wei Dai zxcvda...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I'm trying to call a function inside a module, a PHP_FUNCTION.
Other than zend_eval_stringl, what's the direct way to do it?
Please refer to call_user_function and call_user_function_ex.
...and along these lines, when you
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Marc Bennewitz php@mabe.berlin wrote:
Hi internals!
I've created a draft RFC and patch to change the behavior of non-strict
string to string comparison to be binary safe (as the strict comparison
operator does):
Magento doesn't work with AST patch.
500 response on home page, no crash.
Other applications I tested seem to work.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Nikita,
I think RFC misses few important notes about behavior changes:
1) The
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 10:37 +0800, Wei Dai wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I'm trying to call a function inside a module, a PHP_FUNCTION.
Other than zend_eval_stringl, what's the direct way to do it?
Please refer to call_user_function and call_user_function_ex.
See also the set of
On 17 Aug 2014, at 22:55, Chris Wright c...@daverandom.com wrote:
On 17 August 2014 11:49, David Zuelke d...@heroku.com wrote:
That does not make any sense; applications could accept XML, CSV or whatever
else just as well.
The original proposal is not very useful. $_GET contains parsed
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Remi Collet wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 18/08/2014 11:21, Stas Malyshev a écrit :
BTW, it'd be nice to figure out why we have 6 fails there :)
I already spent a lot of time fixing various non-intel failed tests...
3 related to date can
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Wei Dai wrote:
I'm trying to call a function inside a module, a PHP_FUNCTION.
Other than zend_eval_stringl, what's the direct way to do it?
Please refer to call_user_function and call_user_function_ex.
Actually, you need to be careful with this. If you are calling
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Nikita,
I think RFC misses few important notes about behavior changes:
1) The behavior of $a-$b[$c] is changed. PHP apps that used such syntax
have to be changed into $a-{$b[$c]}.
This is a change from the uniform
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Nikita,
I think RFC misses few important notes about behavior changes:
1) The behavior of $a-$b[$c] is changed. PHP apps that used such syntax
one more problem
sapi/cli/php -r ' $a = [1,2]; list($b, $a) = $a; var_dump($a,$b);'
Segmentation fault
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Nikita,
I think RFC misses few important notes about behavior changes:
Hi,
Please take a look into the proposed new Memory Manager for PHP:
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/777
The patch provides visible performance improvement on real life apps
(tested on Linux 32 and 64 bit). It's based on ideas mainly borrowed from
jemalloc and tcmalloc.
I hope, the patch
On 17.08.2014 22:18, Sara Golemon wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Marc Bennewitz php@mabe.berlin wrote:
I've created a draft RFC and patch to change the behavior of non-strict
string to string comparison to be binary safe (as the strict comparison
operator does):
hi,
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Marc Bennewitz php@mabe.berlin wrote:
On 17.08.2014 22:18, Sara Golemon wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Marc Bennewitz php@mabe.berlin wrote:
I've created a draft RFC and patch to change the behavior of non-strict
string to string comparison
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 02:44:36PM +0200, Marc Bennewitz wrote:
What exactly is wrong with ===, strcmp(), etc..?
The question isn't What's wrong with ===, strcmp()? but What's
wrong with ==, , ?.
We have a standard way to compare two operands but currently we do
some magic things to
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi,
What do you think about merging the following proposals into a single and
consistent one:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hinting_with_cast
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/returntypehinting
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/nullable_typehints
I think it makes sense to keep syntax consistent with
On 18 Aug 2014, at 15:11, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
What do you think about merging the following proposals into a single and
consistent one:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hinting_with_cast
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/returntypehinting
I see your point. For me they just don't have a lot of sense without each
other.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 18 Aug 2014, at 15:11, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
What do you think about merging the following proposals into
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm planning to release 5.6.0 from RC4 if nothing serious comes up, so
this is just a heads-up: if you think that there is some fix, which should
make into the 5.6.0 final (which isn't in RC4) or if you think that
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 14:44 +0200, Marc Bennewitz wrote:
The question isn't What's wrong with ===, strcmp()? but What's wrong
with ==, , ?.
We have a standard way to compare two operands but currently we do some
magic things to solve something that don't need to be solved.
Still it is a
On 18 Aug, 2014, at 10:47 pm, Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de
wrote:
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 14:44 +0200, Marc Bennewitz wrote:
The question isn't What's wrong with ===, strcmp()? but What's wrong
with ==, , ?.
We have a standard way to compare two operands but currently we do
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 23:09 +0800, Tjerk Meesters wrote:
On 18 Aug, 2014, at 10:47 pm, Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de
wrote:
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 14:44 +0200, Marc Bennewitz wrote:
The question isn't What's wrong with ===, strcmp()? but What's wrong
with ==, , ?.
We
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 17:30 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
foreach ($db-query(SELECT id, title FROM entries) as $row) {
echo trtd;
if ($row[0] == $_GET['highlight_id']) {
echo background='#ff';
}
echo .htmlentities($row[1])./td/tr;
}
Am 18.08.2014 um 16:21 schrieb Dmitry Stogov:
For me they just don't have a lot of sense without each other.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/returntypehinting makes sense without
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hinting_with_cast and
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/nullable_typehints IMHO.
--
PHP
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Some more problems I found:
- few tests started fail with the patch
Zend Multibyte and ShiftJIS
[Zend/tests/multibyte/multibyte_encoding_001.phpt]
zend multibyte (8) [ext/mbstring/tests/zend_multibyte-08.phpt]
Thanks,
Hi internals!
I've opened the vote on the Abstract Syntax Tree RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/abstract_syntax_tree#vote
Thanks,
Nikita
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
I see your point. For me they just don't have a lot of sense without each
other.
I am the author of two of those RFCs. I've worked with several members
of the HHVM team so that any inconsistencies are planned and recorded
(or
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi,
Please take a look into the proposed new Memory Manager for PHP:
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/777
It looks like the gains are mostly earned by passing size information;
is that correct?
--
PHP Internals - PHP
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi,
Please take a look into the proposed new Memory Manager for PHP:
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/777
It looks like the gains are mostly
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi,
Please take a look into the proposed new Memory Manager for PHP:
Hi Levi,
The implementation is really not a problem. It must be quite simple and I
may take care about it.
The problem that we can't come to agreement on scalar type hinting for
years :(
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Levi Morrison morrison.l...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug
Hi!
Since we've had phpng branch merged to master the build on Travis CI is
broken for master (as in, doesn't even build). Could it be fixed? It's
not a good thing that we have master branch that CI can not even run on.
I suspect it has to do with phpdbg but didn't look into it in depth.
--
Hi!
I opted for master-only on the grounds that while it's an improvement,
it's not really a bugfix, and released versions (or versions as near
to release as 5.6 is) should be bug-fix only. I know there's an
argument for this *being* a bug-fix, but...
If a consensus feels it should be
Am 19.8.2014 um 00:09 schrieb Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com:
Hi!
Since we've had phpng branch merged to master the build on Travis CI is
broken for master (as in, doesn't even build). Could it be fixed? It's
not a good thing that we have master branch that CI can not even run on.
I
Hi!
Moving this out of other topics into its own: according to the release
RFC, we should have 5.4 have 2 years of bugfixes one year of security
fixes. Since 5.4 was released in March 2012, we're already past 2 year
mark. However, we're still have some bugfixes in 5.4, so I'd like to do
this:
-
On 18 Aug 2014, at 00:40, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
Hi!
It does, but maybe you missed it. Under the Proposal section:
To solve this, we relax the current invariant of scoped closures
having to be
Hi Derick,
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Wei Dai wrote:
I'm trying to call a function inside a module, a PHP_FUNCTION.
Other than zend_eval_stringl, what's the direct way to do it?
Please refer to call_user_function and call_user_function_ex.
Actually, you need to be careful with
I will +1 this as I have had to deal with some of these struggles, as a
suggestion though:
Like the bind(To) methods, a static class cannot be bound (using →call
will fail)
I would like to see this function work like
Closure::bind()/Closure::bindTo() and give the option for the $newScope
option.
Hi Nikita,
I reviewed the AST RFC on my way to vote but there was something that wasn’t
clear to me.
This patch introduces some semantic/behavioral changes in addition to the AST.
Are these as a side-effect of how AST was implemented? Or are they unrelated to
the AST patch?
I think some of them
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de
wrote:
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 23:09 +0800, Tjerk Meesters wrote:
On 18 Aug, 2014, at 10:47 pm, Johannes Schlüter
johan...@schlueters.de wrote:
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 14:44 +0200, Marc Bennewitz wrote:
The
Hey:
thanks very much for testing this.
then seems I should not commit this for now.
thanks
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Remi Collet r...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 18/08/2014 11:21, Stas Malyshev a écrit :
BTW, it'd be nice to
On 08/17/2014 03:55 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
On 17 August 2014 11:49, David Zuelke d...@heroku.com wrote:
That does not make any sense; applications could accept XML, CSV or whatever
else just as well.
The original proposal is not very useful. $_GET contains parsed query string
info, $_POST
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Hi Levi,
The implementation is really not a problem. It must be quite simple and I
may take care about it.
The problem that we can't come to agreement on scalar type hinting for years
:(
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, Aug
The patch looks good and seems to contain the necessary opcache changes.
I'm not sure if you really need zend_return_hint.used and
zend_return_hint.class_name_type (may be I just didn't analyze the patch
deep enough).
You may support self by setting zend_return_hint.class_name =
55 matches
Mail list logo
