Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
Hi! 1. What's missing and should be added? First thing perhaps ... which IS Pierre's problem ... Windows snapshots But short of trawling the commit tree ... what HAS already been added? ( links to the CURRENT release notes from the windows site are broken by the way ) We have NEWS for this, don't we? Although I do seem to have missed something in 5.3.3 - where is the constructor in a namespaced class if it's not going to use the those that already exist in the source non-namespaced one. Not having been able to move TO php5.3 yet I seem to have missed that discussion. Discussion starts here: http://marc.info/?l=php-internalsm=127014823111792w=2 The change is that if you have class Foo\Bar\Baz then Baz() isn't its ctor (which it shouldn't be, since it's not the name of the class, Foo\Bar\Baz is). Currently I am still working my way through the holes in PHP5.3.x which is why PHP5.2 is STILL the last stable release as far as my ( windows ) customer sites are concerned. SO sensible debate on the next step forward IS more important and What's wrong with 5.3 on windows (separate topic please :) -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
Stas Malyshev wrote: 1. What's missing and should be added? First thing perhaps ... which IS Pierre's problem ... Windows snapshots But short of trawling the commit tree ... what HAS already been added? ( links to the CURRENT release notes from the windows site are broken by the way ) We have NEWS for this, don't we? If you are referring to the release notes, yes, I was just pointing out that people who are directed to windows.php.net do not get the same level of support as Linux users and currently those links are broken. But the main point was ... where is the NEWS for all the features added to trunk? We need the alpha to create the news to decide what needs changing before releasing. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] What is still missing from windows builds ...
Currently I am still working my way through the holes in PHP5.3.x which is why PHP5.2 is STILL the last stable release as far as my ( windows ) customer sites are concerned. SO sensible debate on the next step forward IS more important and What's wrong with 5.3 on windows (separate topic please :) A number of extensions were dropped because of the rules applied to building them. In my case php_interbase is missing, and since Firebird is the only database I use it's something of a problem. So we simply build it and supply it from the Firebird site. But other extensions are also still lagging behind in conversion to being PHP5.3 compatible. For an off the shelf windows PHP5 build, 5.2.14 is the only one that includes these libraries off the shelf and until 5.3 does I can't point my own customers there. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: Stas Malyshev wrote: 1. What's missing and should be added? First thing perhaps ... which IS Pierre's problem ... Windows snapshots But short of trawling the commit tree ... what HAS already been added? ( links to the CURRENT release notes from the windows site are broken by the way ) We have NEWS for this, don't we? If you are referring to the release notes, yes, I was just pointing out that people who are directed to windows.php.net do not get the same level of support as Linux users and currently those links are broken. But the main point was ... where is the NEWS for all the features added to trunk? We need the alpha to create the news to decide what needs changing before releasing. http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/NEWS?view=markup -- Alexey Zakhlestin http://www.milkfarmsoft.com/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Strict typing
At 04:02 12/08/2010, Josh Davis wrote: What would be interesting to see is what people think of Derick's latest proposal allowing both the strict typechecking and the more sensible weak typing There's nothing new about it, it's been on the table for around half a year now. Everyone who opposes strict typing on grounds that it's an alien feature to PHP(*) doesn't see any advantages in this suggestion, as everything that's bad in strict typing remains on the table. If there were only two options left on earth, strict typing and strict+auto-conversion, I'd vote for going with just strict. Zeev (*) http://wiki.php.net/rfc/typecheckingstrictandweakhttp://wiki.php.net/rfc/typecheckingstrictandweak - 'Why is strict type checking problematic' -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
Hi! A number of extensions were dropped because of the rules applied to building them. In my case php_interbase is missing, and since Firebird is the only database I use it's something of a problem. So we simply build it and supply it from the Firebird site. But other extensions are also still lagging behind in conversion to being PHP5.3 compatible. Wait, you mean PHP binary builds miss ext/interbase? But you can always build it yourself (or have somebody do it for you ;), it's not incompatibility in PHP 5.3. Or you mean something is missing in the code? For an off the shelf windows PHP5 build, 5.2.14 is the only one that includes these libraries off the shelf and until 5.3 does I can't point my own customers there. You mean you can't point them to download binary builds from windows.php.net? That doesn't make 5.3 unstable though... -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Strict typing
If there were only two options left on earth, strict typing and strict+auto-conversion, I'd vote for going with just strict. Completely agree. I'm against strict approach, but I would prefer strict to strict+auto-conversion. I see a sense in weak typehints. I see a lesser sense in strict. And I see lesser lesser sense in combining the two. And, for the record: I vote for keeping the status quo regarding typehints. If this feature causes so much debate, why not leave it until better times and concentrate on other ones? I hope this comment will be of interest in the context of What would be interesting to see is what people think of Derick's latest proposal allowing both the strict typechecking and the more sensible weak typing. I am a PHP end-user so I am one of the people, too. 2010/8/12 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com: At 04:02 12/08/2010, Josh Davis wrote: What would be interesting to see is what people think of Derick's latest proposal allowing both the strict typechecking and the more sensible weak typing There's nothing new about it, it's been on the table for around half a year now. Everyone who opposes strict typing on grounds that it's an alien feature to PHP(*) doesn't see any advantages in this suggestion, as everything that's bad in strict typing remains on the table. If there were only two options left on earth, strict typing and strict+auto-conversion, I'd vote for going with just strict. Zeev (*) http://wiki.php.net/rfc/typecheckingstrictandweakhttp://wiki.php.net/rfc/typecheckingstrictandweak - 'Why is strict type checking problematic' -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- С уважением, Виктор -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Strict typing
2010/8/12 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com: At 04:02 12/08/2010, Josh Davis wrote: What would be interesting to see is what people think of Derick's latest proposal allowing both the strict typechecking and the more sensible weak typing Everyone who opposes strict typing on grounds that it's an alien feature to PHP(*) doesn't see any advantages in this suggestion, as everything that's bad in strict typing remains on the table. If there were only two options left on earth, strict typing and strict+auto-conversion, I'd vote for going with just strict. Who appointed you the official anti-strict ambassador? If there really are so many people who think it's the worst idea since the dawn of mankind, it will be revealed when it's inevitably time for a vote. Perhaps if you stopped pretending to know everybody's opinion, it would be easier finding a consensus. Unless someone expressed their opinion, it is *unknown*. Stick to expressing your *own* opinion. I don't see any reason why we can't provide smartcast for when the API provider cares about the value *and* strict typing for when the API provider cares about the data type. Providing both options instead of only strict is entirely different. If there is only strict, then that is the only option the PHP users have if they want type hinting (yes, incorrect term, yadda yadda). If both are available, people still have the option to use strict in the specific use cases where they need it, but use smartcast otherwise. If you don't like function foo(int $i) (strict) vs. function foo((int) $i) (smarcast), it could just as well be function foo(int $i) (smartcast) and function foo(+int $i) (strict, other char than plus could possibly be used). This has two benefits to the former syntax choices: 1) The smartcast syntax would be consistent with how the APIs are documented in PHP's documentation, so the syntax in PHP would not conflict. 2) +int isn't used anywhere, so it's obvious that it's something different and it's easy to see in API documentations, auto-completion, etc. -- Daniel Egeberg -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote: Hi! A number of extensions were dropped because of the rules applied to building them. In my case php_interbase is missing, and since Firebird is the only database I use it's something of a problem. So we simply build it and supply it from the Firebird site. But other extensions are also still lagging behind in conversion to being PHP5.3 compatible. Wait, you mean PHP binary builds miss ext/interbase? And some more. Pierre mentioned that the firebird extension will be bundled with 5.3.3 but AFAIK it didn't happened. There are some info about the missing extensions here: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46971 But you can always build it yourself (or have somebody do it for you ;), it's not incompatibility in PHP 5.3. Or you mean something is missing in the code? Yeah, but building php or the extensions is not the easiest thing to do, on linux you just type apt-get install php5-extension or pecl install extension, but for windows: - pecl install doesn't work on windows (obviously) - http://pecl4win.php.net/ - The pecl4win build box is temporarily out of service. // Temporary my ass. :/ - setting up a (free) build environment for php on windows is PITA. at least that was it, when I did last time. there are multiple how-to, but almost all of them is outdated. thanks again to Pierre ( http://www.php.net/~pierre/ ) for manually building some extensions for windows and AFAIK there is some problem with building the extension for the VC6 or VC9 builds: About GMP, it won't make it with VC6, move to VC9 if you need it. snmp support has been restored in 5.3.3RC1 (VC9 only) and sybase_ct is VC6 only, so if you need both sybase_ct AND (enchant OR gmp OR snmp) then you are screwed. For an off the shelf windows PHP5 build, 5.2.14 is the only one that includes these libraries off the shelf and until 5.3 does I can't point my own customers there. You mean you can't point them to download binary builds from windows.php.net? That doesn't make 5.3 unstable though... see above. Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] What is still missing from windows builds ...
2010.08.12 09:59 Lester Caine rašė: Currently I am still working my way through the holes in PHP5.3.x which is why PHP5.2 is STILL the last stable release as far as my ( windows ) customer sites are concerned. SO sensible debate on the next step forward IS more important and What's wrong with 5.3 on windows (separate topic please :) Last time I've checked gettext extension was broken. http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=49349. Extension works only in one locale. Maybe things changed in latest builds, but bug tracker entry is still open. Based on things I've seen on process explorer, extension tries to read files (locale aliases) that are available only on build machine. -- Tomas -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
(after clarification on what Zeev meant, there was a bit of a follow up that I'm posting as reply): On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Zeev Suraski wrote: How is it different from having both options? Given enough time isn't it exactly the same thing? Argument verification should not be a customizable feature. Collecting the info (for documentation purposes and reflection) is something else and I think that's fine - and then the only question that remains is the syntax (which IIRC includes modifiers for strict/weak that we should probably clean up). If I understood the idea behind the patch, you want to pass on the argument validation function to the engine on startup. That means that overnight there'll be a version of PHP supporting different validation functions. Or am I missing something? Well, PHP wouldn't support it directly. But it would allow a zend extension like Xdebug to provide a strict validation function while debugging and development. Very similar to the overloaded zend_error_cb and var_dump() function. During production you'd obviously *not* have a caster/strict type validator. It seems quite clear that you lot don't like a strict type check; whereas another lot don't like a casting typecast. I'd be much for your option #3 (no scalar type hint/cast/strict check by default); but still allow other tools to access the information that's been supplied by the parser. That doesn't even necessarily have to be an argument validator/cast/type check of course; but simple introspection tools that makes marshalling data to other more type-sensitive data sources. I've been working with MongoDB here for the past week, and that'd be such a data source. Derick At 21:38 11/08/2010, Derick Rethans wrote: On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Stas Malyshev wrote: So I'd propose doing the following: 1. Moving parameter typing to a feature branch (by branching current trunk and then rolling back the typing part in the trunk). 2. Starting 5.4 alpha process after that basing on trunk. Any objections to this? A little bit; yes. There is indeed 0 consensus for having the strict typehints. However, instead of removing it altogether, and instead answering every mail in this thread :P, I wrote/am writing a patch that removes the hard type checks. It however keeps the parsed structures and reflection API for it. In this sense, they're actually real hints. The patch also adds a mechanism similariy to the zend_error_cb mechanism so that extensions could override the argument type checking. As my use case for strict checking is development I'd be happy to just move the hard checks into an extension. I could even offer a soft check. It also allows some type inference which might be useful for webservice introspecition generation. I am sure SOAP might have some benefit of this, and I know that at least pecl/dbus does. The patch is attached, but not ready (I haven't remove the hard checks yet because things got busy at work). Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Strict typing
At 10:57 12/08/2010, Daniel Egeberg wrote: Everyone who opposes strict typing on grounds that it's an alien feature to PHP(*) doesn't see any advantages in this suggestion Perhaps if you stopped pretending to know everybody's opinion Suggest you re-read what I said, you didn't seem to understand it. Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
Ferenc Kovacs wrote: - setting up a (free) build environment for php on windows is PITA. at least that was it, when I did last time. there are multiple how-to, but almost all of them is outdated. thanks again to Pierre ( http://www.php.net/~pierre/ http://www.php.net/%7Epierre/ ) for manually building some extensions for windows and AFAIK there is some problem with building the extension for the VC6 or VC9 builds: I have a dedicated machine with it all on simply because it destroys my Borland development environment if I put the free M$ stuff any where near it :( But I'm building 64bit-VC9 stuff to go with the 64bit Apache builds - which is yet another spanner. I have to rely on others for the 32bit builds ... which is why a simple complete download would be nice. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
Alexey Zakhlestin wrote: But the main point was ... where is the NEWS for all the features added to trunk? We need the alpha to create the news to decide what needs changing before releasing. http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/NEWS?view=markup Simple example of the problem with that ... line 53 - Added scalar typehinting. (Ilia, Derick) Where there is a bug fix, there is at least a bug report to pick up on, but new features with just a single line reference then mean spending time trying to find the details. Most of the 'added' lines mean nothing to me,and I can probably ignore them, but that is then when I get bitten later simply because the implications are not easily located? At the moment I'm not seeing any real reason there that this isn't just a 5.3.4 release? If you take out the controversial stuff. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] What is still missing from windows builds ...
fixed in 5.3.3, see the bug report too. On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Tomas Kuliavas to...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: 2010.08.12 09:59 Lester Caine rašė: Currently I am still working my way through the holes in PHP5.3.x which is why PHP5.2 is STILL the last stable release as far as my ( windows ) customer sites are concerned. SO sensible debate on the next step forward IS more important and What's wrong with 5.3 on windows (separate topic please :) Last time I've checked gettext extension was broken. http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=49349. Extension works only in one locale. Maybe things changed in latest builds, but bug tracker entry is still open. Based on things I've seen on process explorer, extension tries to read files (locale aliases) that are available only on build machine. -- Tomas -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
hi, On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ferenc Kovacs i...@tyrael.hu wrote: And some more. Pierre mentioned that the firebird extension will be bundled with 5.3.3 but AFAIK it didn't happened. There are some info about the missing extensions here: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46971 Many things are supposed to be done at a given time and then failed. Shit happens as one likes to say. Anyway, it does not make 5.3.3 less stable or bad, and given the amount of complains about firebird (except Lester, who does it endlessly since 5.3.0), it is not a big deal. Yeah, but building php or the extensions is not the easiest thing to do, on linux you just type apt-get install php5-extension or pecl install extension, but for windows: - pecl install doesn't work on windows (obviously) - http://pecl4win.php.net/ - The pecl4win build box is temporarily out of service. // Temporary my ass. :/ - setting up a (free) build environment for php on windows is PITA. at least that was it, when I did last time. there are multiple how-to, but almost all of them is outdated. I think you really need two things: - Read the answers I gave you already - Read the doc, build PHP or PHP extensions on Windows is very easy. To get the right libs or build non compatible lib is not, but that's not something we can fix easily. See http://wiki.php.net/internals/windows/stepbystepbuild thanks again to Pierre ( http://www.php.net/~pierre/ ) for manually building some extensions for windows and AFAIK there is some problem with building the extension for the VC6 or VC9 builds: About GMP, it won't make it with VC6, move to VC9 if you need it. snmp support has been restored in 5.3.3RC1 (VC9 only) Because the lib does not support VC6. Same for Enchant for example, or other libs. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
Stas Malyshev wrote: That doesn't make 5.3 unstable though... Unstable no .. and even php_interbase is perfectly stable on it! Unusable no .. A pain because you have to add stuff from various sites which were once all bundled on php.net ... most definitely yes A download of PHP5.2.x simply works out of the box on windows ... currently some of us have to jump through hoops to create a downloadable windows build of 5.3 that our customers can use. The problem is quite definitely because of the quagmire of library versions that exist on windows and as yet my own customers are only just talking about loosing W2k so many of the newer versions are not necessary. But we DO need a clean source of the 'new' format windows builds and that is something Pierre obviously does not have the time to provide, hence the proliferation of builds from other sites rather than direct from windows.php.net -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
hi, On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: A download of PHP5.2.x simply works out of the box on windows ... currently some of us have to jump through hoops to create a downloadable windows build of 5.3 that our customers can use. The problem is quite definitely because of the quagmire of library versions that exist on windows and as yet my own customers are only just talking about loosing W2k so many of the newer versions are not necessary. But we DO need a clean source of the 'new' format windows builds and that is something Pierre obviously does not have the time to provide, hence the proliferation of builds from other sites rather than direct from windows.php.net Your apps were running using 5.2.x before 5.3.x was out. What does it make 5.3 a requirement now? If you can't explain that to your customers, then you are out of luck. Windows 2000 is not supported anymore by Microsoft, why should we support it? And it was a dead cow already since years. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
Am 12.08.2010 10:31, schrieb Derick Rethans: Well, PHP wouldn't support it directly. But it would allow a zend extension like Xdebug to provide a strict validation function while debugging and development. Very similar to the overloaded zend_error_cb and var_dump() function. During production you'd obviously *not* have a caster/strict type validator. Sounds reasonable to me. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
Am 11.08.2010 20:30, schrieb Stas Malyshev: What do you think? +1 :-) -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
Pierre Joye wrote: A download of PHP5.2.x simply works out of the box on windows ... currently some of us have to jump through hoops to create a downloadable windows build of 5.3 that our customers can use. The problem is quite definitely because of the quagmire of library versions that exist on windows and as yet my own customers are only just talking about loosing W2k so many of the newer versions are not necessary. But we DO need a clean source of the 'new' format windows builds and that is something Pierre obviously does not have the time to provide, hence the proliferation of builds from other sites rather than direct from windows.php.net Your apps were running using 5.2.x before 5.3.x was out. What does it make 5.3 a requirement now? If you can't explain that to your customers, then you are out of luck. Windows 2000 is not supported anymore by Microsoft, why should we support it? And it was a dead cow already since years. And the relevance of that outburst? The number of people who complain about problems with the projects I am involved with because THEY are running 5.3 means that we have to cater for it ... end of story. I was TRYING to be constructive since I do understand YOUR problems even if I do not accept your rules for solving them. The problem is simply 'windows' and I could quite happily simply tell customers we do not support it since there is no problem with Linux servers, but they have millions of pounds worth of investment in windows and will not change ... so support has to cater for that situation. Making the Linux machines stay on 5.2 is even more of a problem ... if the distro decides they only support 5.3 :( So simply sticking with 5.2 while possible ... is not practical longer term ... especially if 5.3 is the LTS version of choice. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote: hi, On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ferenc Kovacs i...@tyrael.hu wrote: And some more. Pierre mentioned that the firebird extension will be bundled with 5.3.3 but AFAIK it didn't happened. There are some info about the missing extensions here: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46971 Many things are supposed to be done at a given time and then failed. Shit happens as one likes to say. Anyway, it does not make 5.3.3 less stable or bad, and given the amount of complains about firebird (except Lester, who does it endlessly since 5.3.0), it is not a big deal. I meant no offense, are there any blocker about this issue, or we can tell sure that firebird will be in php 5.3.4? I'm just curious because more than one people told me, that firebird builds just fine for 5.3, so I couln't get it, why takes it this long to get properly bundled (and couldn't found this one one http://php.net/~pierre/). Yeah, but building php or the extensions is not the easiest thing to do, on linux you just type apt-get install php5-extension or pecl install extension, but for windows: - pecl install doesn't work on windows (obviously) - http://pecl4win.php.net/ - The pecl4win build box is temporarily out of service. // Temporary my ass. :/ - setting up a (free) build environment for php on windows is PITA. at least that was it, when I did last time. there are multiple how-to, but almost all of them is outdated. I think you really need two things: - Read the answers I gave you already What did I miss? - Read the doc, build PHP or PHP extensions on Windows is very easy. To get the right libs or build non compatible lib is not, but that's not something we can fix easily. See http://wiki.php.net/internals/windows/stepbystepbuild I will/have to set up my windows buildbox again, but as far as I can remember last time when I did (probably a year ago) I run into more than one problem about dependencies (bison, flex), and there was some discussion on the mailing list about that there is more than one tutorial in the docs/wiki, but they are mostly outdated. maybe I'm just unlucky or because I'm using the Express version, dunno. thanks again to Pierre ( http://www.php.net/~pierre/ ) for manually building some extensions for windows and AFAIK there is some problem with building the extension for the VC6 or VC9 builds: About GMP, it won't make it with VC6, move to VC9 if you need it. snmp support has been restored in 5.3.3RC1 (VC9 only) Because the lib does not support VC6. Same for Enchant for example, or other libs. I did mentioned that, I mean that there are other libs that aren't supported in VC6, VC9. the question is, that what can we do about it. I don't like the idea, that we have major differences in the bundled extensions between the VC6 and VC9 versions. the apache guys could really start using the VC9... Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: What is still missing from windows builds ...
Ferenc Kovacs wrote: I will/have to set up my windows buildbox again, but as far as I can remember last time when I did (probably a year ago) I run into more than one problem about dependencies (bison, flex), and there was some discussion on the mailing list about that there is more than one tutorial in the docs/wiki, but they are mostly outdated. maybe I'm just unlucky or because I'm using the Express version, dunno. Ferenc ... I'm running the express version. I certainly don't plan to pay for another windows development environment ;) I had a couple of false starts, but I did finally get this working nicely. I though I had put up a crib sheet on the pointers, but ... Oh there it is http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Compiling+PHP+on+Windows+so+we+can+use+with+Firebird -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: [PECL-DEV] Experimental MySQL-related extensions
On 12 Aug 2010, at 16:04, Johannes Schlüter wrote: While discussing this via IRC it was suggested to create an Experimental top-level category on pecl.php.net and put them there. To me this looks like a good proposal. From there they can easily be picked up, be extended, provide ideas for other modules, ... If nobody objects I'd create that category and we'd commit them to pecl/mysqlnd_mc, pecl/mysqlnd_sip, ... in svn and register the extensions on the website. Sounds good to me. Melanie -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Closures as methods (and Closure::bind)
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:57:47 +0100, Johannes Schlüter
johan...@schlueters.de wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 14:38 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I've updated the wiki page for Closures with objects extension with
things that are in Proposal A with modifications but are not
implemented:
http://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#status_as_of_august_10_2010
I propose an implementation of closures stored in properties used as
methods, as in:
$this-prop = function () { ...}
$this-prop();
[...]
I don#t have an opinion on this feature, yet, I like the current
class-based object model as reading code is relatively simple, with this
addition (and the fact that you can create properties on the fly) we
create a powerful tool for really hard to read code.
It's important to understand this is not mere syntactic sugar over
$a = $this-prop;
$a();
or call_user_func($this-prop). It actually allows executing closures in a
way that fails if the staticness or bound instance of the closure is not
what was expected.
See the beautiful tree graphs on the wiki page.
--
Gustavo Lopes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] How to get script filename in module RINIT function
Yes, that did it! I was wondering what those SG and EGs are :) Anyway, the EG(included_files) would not work, because hash values (file paths) are not stored, only keys. Snippet from Zend/zend.h ... zend_hash_add(EG(included_files), file_handle-opened_path, strlen(file_handle-opened_path)+1, (void *)dummy, sizeof(int), NULL); ... Again, thank you all! b. On 10 August 2010 19:57, Chris Stockton chrisstockto...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I would check the running sapi and use the sapi specific approach. This is cheap performance wise. I.e. SG(request_info).path_translated for Apache I believe and cli example you can Prolly find in the cli sapi source. I see argv being a good place maybe. On Aug 10, 2010 9:44 AM, Bostjan Skufca bost...@a2o.si wrote: 2010/8/10 Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de Hi, On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 17:24 +0200, Bostjan Skufca wrote: I've been digging a little d... So simple thing, so easy to overlook... But I believe it is fairly easy to check if autoprepend is enabled and use second item from the list in that case, or (in case that is not posible) introduce new ini setting for that matter. char *hentry; zend_hash_internal_pointer_reset(EG(included_files)); zend_ha... Aaaa, again, so simple. I feel such a newbie, but obviously not without a reason :) But thinking about this idea I had another idea: Use the userland stacktrace. While this won't w... This would probably mean I have to modify PHP itself or call certain extension function from within PHP script? (That is what I am desperately trying to avoid.) Again, thanks for all the help! b.
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PECL-DEV] Experimental MySQL-related extensions
why did this mail end to internals? Please don't cross post or change lists w/o good reasons :) On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Melanie Rhianna Lewis cybersp...@php.net wrote: On 12 Aug 2010, at 16:04, Johannes Schlüter wrote: While discussing this via IRC it was suggested to create an Experimental top-level category on pecl.php.net and put them there. To me this looks like a good proposal. From there they can easily be picked up, be extended, provide ideas for other modules, ... If nobody objects I'd create that category and we'd commit them to pecl/mysqlnd_mc, pecl/mysqlnd_sip, ... in svn and register the extensions on the website. Sounds good to me. Melanie -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] back to 5.4 alpha
On 12.08.2010, at 00:39, Pierre Joye wrote: On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Ilia Alshanetsky i...@prohost.org wrote: Pierre, With all due respect, there are plenty of things already in trunk to make it a worth while effort to start planning the 5.4 release. Just because you disagree, an opinion you are entitled to (like everyone else), does not mean it is a no go, last I checked no one had veto powers on the future release process. Right, and no one can decide alone when we have to begin a release. Please understand my point: I'm not saying we won't need to begin soon, but I do not accept the way it is done, the total lack of respect of the other core developers and the total lack of roadap, consensus or general agreement about what will be php-next. +1 regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith m...@pooteeweet.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
