Re: [PHP-DOC] build failure [de]
> Fine with me, but we should place &missing; at top of missing-ids.xml > So the following should be the solution for this "problem": > missing-ids.xml: > > &missing; > > > > and put &missing; in language-snippets.ent. > > Benefit: linking to appendix missing-stuff with a short explanation is > working again ;-) I actually meant that every xreflabel (so every link generated for missing content) would include the translated version of the word "missing", so that even before clicked a user (an experienced user at least) would know that it is not really benefical to click that link. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] cvs: phpdoc /en/reference/pdo reference.xml
Wow! That was an awesome set of PDO doc commits, Wez. Great stuff! Dan On 9/11/05, Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > wez Sun Sep 11 23:44:39 2005 EDT > > Modified files: > /phpdoc/en/reference/pdoreference.xml > Log: > fix interrupted sentence... > > > http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml?r1=1.36&r2=1.37&ty=u > Index: phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml > diff -u phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml:1.36 > phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml:1.37 > --- phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml:1.36 Sun Sep 11 17:10:36 2005 > +++ phpdoc/en/reference/pdo/reference.xml Sun Sep 11 23:44:38 2005 > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > - > + > > > > @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ > functions to issue queries and fetch data. PDO does > not provide a database > abstraction; it doesn't rewrite SQL or emulate missing features. You > - should use a full-blown abstraction layer for PDO. > + should use a full-blown abstraction layer if you need that facility. > > > PDO ships with PHP 5.1, and is available as a PECL extension for PHP > 5.0; >
[PHP-DOC] #34455 [Opn->Csd]: class_implements and class_parents
ID: 34455 Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reported By: jumo at gmx dot de -Status: Open +Status: Closed Bug Type: Documentation problem Operating System: debian gnu/linux PHP Version: Irrelevant New Comment: This bug has been fixed in the documentation's XML sources. Since the online and downloadable versions of the documentation need some time to get updated, we would like to ask you to be a bit patient. Thank you for the report, and for helping us make our documentation better. 1. They are part of SPL thus they are under SPL. 2. I've mentioned parents in the function description. Previous Comments: [2005-09-11 13:29:38] jumo at gmx dot de and the search is not helpfull: http://www.php.net/manual-lookup.php?pattern=interface [2005-09-10 14:44:27] jumo at gmx dot de Description: Hi, why aren't the functions class_implements and class_parents here: http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.classobj.php 2nd: the documentation of class_implements reads class_implements -- Return the interfaces which are implemented by the given class but it should be changed to something like: class_implements -- Return the interfaces which are implemented by the given class and its parent classes. Reproduce code: --- Expected result: Array() Actual result: -- Array ( [A] => A [B] => B ) -- Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=34455&edit=1
[PHP-DOC] cvs: phpdoc /en/reference/spl/functions class-implements.xml
vrana Mon Sep 12 09:09:40 2005 EDT Modified files: /phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions class-implements.xml Log: Mention parents (bug #34455) http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml?r1=1.9&r2=1.10&ty=u Index: phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml diff -u phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml:1.9 phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml:1.10 --- phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml:1.9 Thu Aug 4 07:02:17 2005 +++ phpdoc/en/reference/spl/functions/class-implements.xml Mon Sep 12 09:09:37 2005 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ - + class_implements @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ This function returns an array with the names of the interfaces that the - given class implements. + given class and its parents implement.
Re: [PHP-DOC] build failure [de]
Gabor Hojtsy wrote: The "problem" is the increased usage of . Previously authors were encouraged to use to add internal links, which requires text content, so this was no problem. The adoption of lead to this problem. Should we avoid using xref? I don't think so that now it is an option. It is quite convinient in places like the extensions.xml file, where generated content is automatically translated with the titles, and this is the intention of using xref elsewhere too. Less work for translators to look up how exactly they translated some titles => more consistency in translations. +1, xref is a neet feature. 1. What would we put into in place of the dots in the missing-ids.xml file? The proper link-test? Sure, this depends on the content of the id=".." For the example this would become For ini stuff, this works because of some strict rules for naming. Otherwise we might not have this type of rule to generate a meaningful title. What if we do Where &missing; is translated obviously. It would give some clue to users why clicking on that link leads to no content. :) Fine with me, but we should place &missing; at top of missing-ids.xml So the following should be the solution for this "problem": missing-ids.xml: &missing; and put &missing; in language-snippets.ent. Benefit: linking to appendix missing-stuff with a short explanation is working again ;-) Friedhelm
[PHP-DOC] #34390 [Asn->Opn]: Redefinition of static methods in subclasses
ID: 34390
Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reported By: cbelin at free dot fr
-Status: Assigned
+Status: Open
-Bug Type: Class/Object related
+Bug Type: Documentation problem
Operating System: Windows XP SP2
PHP Version: 5.0.4
Assigned To: sniper
New Comment:
Reclassified as docu bug.
Previous Comments:
[2005-09-12 11:37:54] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is documentation bug.
[2005-09-07 11:54:31] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dmitry, shouldn't this procude an error..?
[2005-09-06 13:49:50] cbelin at free dot fr
Description:
Manual says that static members and methods cannot be redefined in
subclasses.
It seems that it's not completely true (at least with PHP 5.0.4 under
Windows XP), as redefining static methods in subclasses is allowed, and
works fine (i.e. without triggering errors even if error level includes
E_STRICT).
Reproduce code:
---
class Base
{
public static function foo()
{
return 'Foo...';
}
}
class Extended extends Base
{
public static function foo()
{
return 'Bar !!!';
}
}
echo Extended::foo();
Expected result:
An error, or the output of Base::foo()
Actual result:
--
It works, and prints 'Bar !!!'
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=34390&edit=1
