On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:50:48AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> Well, for one thing, no one has agreed on a naming convention yet.
>
> So its possible that now we'll have two aliases:
>
> diskfreespace
> disk_free_space
>
> and then the actual function name:
>
> disk_freespace()
> or
> dis
James Moore wrote:
>How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
>function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
>compatibility)?
>
A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in
great length, and at least from what I understo
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:01:46AM +0100, James Moore wrote:
> > If someone feels the need to revert the change, go ahead. I
> > prefer to just leave it now that I've already changed it, and
> > then I'll add the new function as disk_total_space().
>
> Why add more functions to be depreciated s
> > >> How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
> > >> function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
> > >> compatibility)?
> > >
> > > A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in
> > > great length, and at least from what I understood, going
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 07:14:27AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> >> How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
> >> function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
> >> compatibility)?
> >
> > A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in
> > gre
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 01:40 16/5/2001, Jon Parise wrote:
>
>> How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
>> function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
>> compatibility)?
>
>
> A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in
> great length, a
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:47:15AM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
> >function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
> >compatibility)?
>
> A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in great
> length, and
At 01:40 16/5/2001, Jon Parise wrote:
>How do you feel about renaming the existing diskfreespace()
>function to disk_free_space() (with an alias for backwards
>compatibility)?
A warm fuzzy feeling :) Seriously though, it's been discussed in great
length, and at least from what I understood, goi
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:37:51AM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >Yes, but this new version will work correctly under Unix-like
> >systems and Windows NT / 2000 systems. Executing system binaries
> >is sloppy for things like this, anyway.
> >
> >Or perhaps I'm missing your point?
>
> I think yo
At 01:25 16/5/2001, Jon Parise wrote:
> > Wouldnt it make more sense here to correct the name of diskfree_space and
> > and an alias back rather than introducing new functions that are named not
> > according the the standard?
>
>No, I don't think it's really that much of an issue.
We've had a hu
At 01:35 16/5/2001, Jon Parise wrote:
>On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:43:25PM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > >Does anyone object to my adding a new function disktotalspace()?
> > >
> > >A friend of mine ran into a situation where he required an
> > >OS-independent means of determining the amount of
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:43:25PM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >Does anyone object to my adding a new function disktotalspace()?
> >
> >A friend of mine ran into a situation where he required an
> >OS-independent means of determining the amount of free space on a
> >filesystem (meaning executing
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:14:37PM +0100, James Moore wrote:
> > Well, there is no "CVS standard", but rather a standard in the
> > CODING_GUIDELINES file. However, in this case, I think you can
> > disregard that, since the function is so similiar (in nature) to the
> > diskfreespace() function
>
> Well, there is no "CVS standard", but rather a standard in the
> CODING_GUIDELINES file. However, in this case, I think you can
> disregard that, since the function is so similiar (in nature) to the
> diskfreespace() function that disktotalspace() makes the most sense,
> instead of disk_tota
I'm pretty sure we're already incompatible with Windows 95, so I'm not sure
we should go through those hoops - we can just call the function directly...
Zeev
At 05:57 15/5/2001, Jon Parise wrote:
>Does anyone object to my adding a new function disktotalspace()?
>
>A friend of mine ran into a si
Jon Parise wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 06:24:25PM +0100, James Moore wrote:
>
>
>>Before you add it can you name it properly (To the CVS standard).
>>
>
> I don't follow you. How is it named improperly, and what is the
> CVS standard?
>
Well, there is no "CVS standard", but rather a
> > Before you add it can you name it properly (To the CVS standard).
>
> I don't follow you. How is it named improperly, and what is the
> CVS standard?
http://cvs.php.net/viewcvs.cgi/php4/CODING_STANDARDS?rev=1.6&content-type=te
xt/vnd.viewcvs-markup
Derick suggested: diskspace_free and di
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 06:24:25PM +0100, James Moore wrote:
> Before you add it can you name it properly (To the CVS standard).
I don't follow you. How is it named improperly, and what is the
CVS standard?
--
Jon Parise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) . Rochester Inst. of Technology
http://www.csh.ri
Before you add it can you name it properly (To the CVS standard).
cheers,
- James
> -Original Message-
> From: Jon Parise [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 15 May 2001 05:01
> To: Sterling Hughes
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] disktotalspace()
>
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:51:52PM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> The patch looks ok, a couple of questions though...
I'm not the original author of the function, but so I'll answer
as best I can.
> 1) disktotalspace() looks like a memory intensive operation, perhaps
> having a cache might n
The patch looks ok, a couple of questions though...
1) disktotalspace() looks like a memory intensive operation, perhaps
having a cache might not be a bad idea.
2) I see you use LoadLibrary to load in kernel32.dll on Win32, what
happens on that system when I call disk total space more than on
21 matches
Mail list logo
