That's a good point, it should say the PHP tokenizer, or something to that effect (folks who spend more time with the internals could say better what to call it).
The major difference from his previous version of the RFC is his addition of the .phpf format, which would allow including a .php file with <?php and ?> in it from a .phpf file, but would not allow or need any usage of <?php and ?> within the .phpf file itself. On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godj...@gmail.com> wrote: > As far as I read there is no difference from the previous RFC - it > says essentially the same. > > " The <?php tag, contained within one of these files, tells the webserver > to, in essence, "switch to PHP mode" and start parsing the data as PHP code. > When the ?> tag is reached, the webserver "switches back" and resumes > parsing it as HTML. If no tags are given, the webserver will parse the file > data as HTML code until a <?php tag is reached. " > > I'm I the only one who thinks that this is just plain wrong? I know for a > fact that there is no "PHP mode" on the WEB server level. I think I > understand what it tries to say, but I totally disagree with what is > written and don't want to guess anything. > > 24 апреля 2012 г. 22:52 пользователь Kris Craig <kris.cr...@gmail.com>написал: > >> Hi all, >> >> I finally found some time today to update the RFC based on discussions >> here. Please have a look and let me know if I missed anything or if >> there's anything else that needs clarifying: >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/phpp >> >> >> I also want to know if this is sufficient to satisfy some of the concerns >> that have been raised about being able to implement this into existing >> frameworks that use a more "tangled" architecture. >> >> Thanks! =) >> >> --Kris >> -- Tom Boutell P'unk Avenue 215 755 1330 punkave.com window.punkave.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
