Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: bug of the day: $this
On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 22:11, Stig S. Bakken wrote: It won't be different in ZE2. This is not a bug though, but a tricky design issue. The problem is figuring out at runtime when to set $this or not in a method. What most people would probably find intuitive, is that $this was set only in methods called in the object, but this would require pretty expensive checks for every method call. Maybe the roots of OO is my problem. PHP does similar, but not exactly. I don't know whether you like clear things, or is this clear to you, but I see confusion about handling $this. Excerpt from the documentation: http://www.php.net/manual/en/language.oop.php Within a class definition, you do not know under which name the object will be accessible in your program: at the time the Cart class was written, it was unknown that the object will be named $cart or $another_cart later. Thus, you cannot write $cart-items within the Cart class itself. Instead, in order to be able to access it's own functions and variables from within a class, one can use the pseudo-variable $this which can be read as 'my own' or 'current object'. Thus, '$this-items[$artnr] += $num' can be read as 'add $num to the $artnr counter of my own items array' or 'add $num to the $artnr counter of the items array within the current object'. Andi can shed more light on this if needed. Andi, please tell me why. -- jul -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] PHP 4 Bug Summary Report
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net Num Status Summary (1009 total including feature requests) ===[*Configuration Issues] 13561 Assigned --without-pear prevent install of php-config,phpize,... 19282 Won't fix Place php4ts.dll into \sapi 20490 Analyzed enable versioning not supported on OSX 20689 Won\'t fix php_admin_value disable_functions not working as it should ===[*General Issues]== 20195 Open make install doesnt set permissions 20604 Feedback PHP CLI exists always with Segmantation Fault 20806 Feedback display of rows in browse incorrect due to field names ===[*Languages/Translation]=== 11975 Won't fix mix of hebrew english 13014 Won't fix hebrevc () 20166 Open Unicode (Slovenian) characters are not displayed correctly ===[*Network Functions]=== 15639 Suspended detecting end of UDP packets ===[Apache related]=== 14409 Open request for nonexistent file does not return 404 error 15529 Open ap_cleanup_for_exec not used when creating 17837 Won't fix PHP 'handles' permission problems rather than letting Apache do it 19113 Open HTTP status 200 returned on HTTP CONNECT when mod_proxy not in use 19292 Critical random error: open_basedir restriction in effect. File is in wrong directory 20053 Open apachesuexecphp-cgiignore_user_abort - problem with cancelled connections 20104 Open unhandled exception with multiple requests 20190 Critical Random mem corruption: zend_get_executed_filename() mismatch 20643 Open long POST fields get truncated 20665 Feedback Memory leaks on SIGHUP ===[Apache2 related]== 17098 Analyzed apache sending 304 - not modified header 17414 Open Segfaults on restart 17566 Open phpinfo() causes load of 2+ 17868 Verified Doesn't work two and more !--include-- directives of PHP code on different OS 18648 Open Single entry form POST gives incorrect variable content 18957 Won't fix multiple definitions 19739 Open php-4.2.3 fails to Install with Apache 2.0.42 on AIX 5.1 ML2 19787 Won\'t fix Can not load module 19918 Open no libphp4.so produced 20569 Open Apache fails when restarting 20701 Feedback ld: can't locate file for: -laprutiland after 20823 Open form post results in duplicitous $_REQUEST ===[Arrays related]=== 18829 Won\'t fix array_pop, array_shift, array_push... functions very slow with large arrays 20251 Won\'t fix Can't assign values to array in loop. ===[BC math related]== 13551 Open BC functions apply decimal places argument also on arguments ===[CCVS related]= 10447 Won\'t fix ccvs_*() functions segfault when given invalid session ID ===[Class/Object related]= 15675 Suspended get_class() returns only lower chars 17637 Analyzed constructors in classes (Back to PHP3) 20520 Open Nonsymetric data syncronization with references 20531 Open Object property association broken 20709 Feedback Session variable getting mysteriously set ===[COM related]== 15771 Suspended cannot pass value to image field by ado 16375 Suspended Feature: Support for VARIANT multi dimensional arrays 19150 Open Overloaded COM Property Set Leaks Memory 20100 Open Com Performance/Memory issues 20282 Open COM memory leak ===[Compile Failure]== 1298 Verified need to use -taso with Netscape LDAP libs 7643 Open APXS compile fails with not a DSO 10108 Open cc 1501:218 file XXX contains an incorrect file suffix 14245 Verified make install fails on apxs 17820 Won't fix php.ini-dist not copied 18358 Won't fix Recode doesn't compile with apache2 19555 Feedback GNU pthreads issue? 19973 Open compile zlib and pcre as shared fails 20444 Won\'t fix Various compile warnings and one error. 20546 Feedback compile with gcc 3.2 fails due to parser errors 20626 Feedback Fails to build Apache shared module (not mkstemp) 20747 Feedback Comile of flock_compat.c fauks 20752 Analyzed Seems like it has something to do with ZEND_API(?). 20768 Won\'t fix MySql temp file error 20827 Open stat macro ===[Compile Warning]== 20563 Won\'t fix GCC 2.96 warning 20762 Open Warning compiling with mailparse ===[cURL related]= 20263 Suspended feof doesn't
[PHP-DEV] Latest ZE2 changes
Hi Zeev, I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way you modified my patch: 1) private_002.phpt fails with 004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail' in %s on line %d 004+ Fatal error: Call to public method fail::show() from context 'fail' in /usr/src/php4-HEAD/tests/classes/private_002.php on line 18 The new error message is wrong. We are trying to access pass::show and not fail::show(). 2) private_007.phpt and private_007b.phpt both fail with the message Fatal error: Cannot redeclare private bar::priv() as public foo::priv() That means the children know about their parents privates what is in contrast to our discussion. The reason they do is because you skipped the part of the patch where in zend_do_inheritance() a modified version of zend_hash_merge_ex() was used to prevent this. But you also do not search for the private method in the calling scope. In other words you mainly used the first version of my patch. So i tried to strip down zend_hash_merge_with_argument_if() to the portion we need and tried to skip copying zje privates. But since privates are no longer looked up in the calling scope this fails. 3) You left in some snippets of the 'final' patch. Does this mean we are going to have final? A new patch is also available. Testfiles and patches can be downloaded here: http://marcus-boerger.de/php/ext/ze2/ regards marcus By the way what does ZEND_ACC_xxx stand for? -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
hi, Here's an improved version of this patch, which doesn't SEGFAULT on invalid input. Someone just brought up this topic on php-de and qmail, so I thought there is some interest in this patch .. Everbody else just ignore me :) -daniel -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
--- php-4.2.3/ext/standard/mail.c Sat Aug 24 13:38:13 2002
+++ php-4.2.3-daniel/ext/standard/mail.cMon Dec 2 01:24:35 2002
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include stdlib.h
#include ctype.h
#include stdio.h
+#include string.h
#include php.h
#include ext/standard/info.h
#if !defined(PHP_WIN32)
@@ -124,6 +125,84 @@
}
/* }}} */
+char *get_header_value(char *line)
+{
+ while(*line *line != ':')
+ line++;
+
+ if(!*line)
+ return NULL;
+
+ line++;
+
+ while(isspace(*line))
+ line++;
+
+ return strdup(line);
+}
+
+char *get_header(char *header_name, char *headers)
+{
+ char *line, *value=NULL;
+ int header_name_len = strlen(header_name);
+ int len=0;
+
+ do {
+ if(*headers == '\n' || *headers == '\0') {
+ if(len header_name_len) {
+ len = 0;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if((line = (char *)malloc(len + 1)) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ headers -= len;
+
+ strncpy(line, headers, len);
+ line[len] = '\0';
+
+ headers += len;
+
+ if(strncmp(line, header_name, header_name_len) == 0) {
+ value = get_header_value(line);
+ }
+
+ free(line);
+
+ len = 0;
+ } else {
+ ++len;
+ }
+ } while(*headers++ value == NULL);
+
+ return value;
+}
+
+char *extract_address(char *address)
+{
+ char *start, *stop, *tmp;
+
+ if((start = stop = strchr(address, '@')) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ while(start = address !isspace(*start) *start != '')
+ start--;
+
+ start++;
+
+ while(*stop !isspace(*stop) *stop != '')
+ stop++;
+
+ if((tmp = (char *)malloc(stop - start + 1)) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ strncpy(tmp, start, stop - start);
+ tmp[stop-start] = '\0';
+
+ return tmp;
+}
+
/* {{{ php_mail
*/
PHPAPI int php_mail(char *to, char *subject, char *message, char *headers, char
*extra_cmd)
@@ -135,6 +214,8 @@
int ret;
char *sendmail_path = INI_STR(sendmail_path);
char *sendmail_cmd = NULL;
+ char *return_path;
+ char *address;
if (!sendmail_path) {
#ifdef PHP_WIN32
@@ -169,6 +250,25 @@
fprintf(sendmail, To: %s\n, to);
fprintf(sendmail, Subject: %s\n, subject);
if (headers != NULL) {
+
+ /* Existing Return-Path should not be overwritten */
+ if((return_path = get_header(Return-Path, headers)) != NULL)
+{
+ free(return_path);
+ }
+ else {
+
+ if((return_path = get_header(From, headers)) !=
+NULL) {
+
+ if((address = extract_address(return_path)) !=
+NULL) {
+ fprintf(sendmail, Return-Path:
+%s\n, address);
+ free(address);
+ }
+
+ free(return_path);
+
+ }
+ }
+
fprintf(sendmail, %s\n, headers);
}
fprintf(sendmail, \n%s\n, message);
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Latest ZE2 changes
At 17:02 07/12/2002, Marcus Börger wrote: Hi Zeev, I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way you modified my patch: 1) private_002.phpt fails with 004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail' in %s on line %d 004+ Fatal error: Call to public method fail::show() from context 'fail' in /usr/src/php4-HEAD/tests/classes/private_002.php on line 18 I see the problem. It should be fixed. The new error message is wrong. We are trying to access pass::show and not fail::show(). 2) private_007.phpt and private_007b.phpt both fail with the message Fatal error: Cannot redeclare private bar::priv() as public foo::priv() That means the children know about their parents privates what is in contrast to our discussion. The reason they do is because you skipped the part of the patch where in zend_do_inheritance() a modified version of zend_hash_merge_ex() was used to prevent this. But you also do not search for the private method in the calling scope. In other words you mainly used the first version of my patch. So i tried to strip down zend_hash_merge_with_argument_if() to the portion we need and tried to skip copying zje privates. But since privates are no longer looked up in the calling scope this fails. I implement PPP in a different way altogether (it's very loosely based on your patch, the actual implementation is very different), in order to avoid having two hash lookups for every method call. I left a comment in the code that says we may want to improve the error messages, but the current implementation is quite intentional - it's much more efficient. 3) You left in some snippets of the 'final' patch. Does this mean we are going to have final? A new patch is also available. No, we're not going to add final, at least not for now. I may have forgotten to remove the scanner part of the patch but it's meaningless :) Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not emalloc()/efree()?
Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy(). (Weird I mentioned it twice
in one day :)
http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html
Andi
At 04:54 PM 12/7/2002 +0100, Daniel Lorch wrote:
--- php-4.2.3/ext/standard/mail.c Sat Aug 24 13:38:13 2002
+++ php-4.2.3-daniel/ext/standard/mail.cMon Dec 2 01:24:35 2002
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include stdlib.h
#include ctype.h
#include stdio.h
+#include string.h
#include php.h
#include ext/standard/info.h
#if !defined(PHP_WIN32)
@@ -124,6 +125,84 @@
}
/* }}} */
+char *get_header_value(char *line)
+{
+ while(*line *line != ':')
+ line++;
+
+ if(!*line)
+ return NULL;
+
+ line++;
+
+ while(isspace(*line))
+ line++;
+
+ return strdup(line);
+}
+
+char *get_header(char *header_name, char *headers)
+{
+ char *line, *value=NULL;
+ int header_name_len = strlen(header_name);
+ int len=0;
+
+ do {
+ if(*headers == '\n' || *headers == '\0') {
+ if(len header_name_len) {
+ len = 0;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if((line = (char *)malloc(len + 1)) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ headers -= len;
+
+ strncpy(line, headers, len);
+ line[len] = '\0';
+
+ headers += len;
+
+ if(strncmp(line, header_name, header_name_len) == 0) {
+ value = get_header_value(line);
+ }
+
+ free(line);
+
+ len = 0;
+ } else {
+ ++len;
+ }
+ } while(*headers++ value == NULL);
+
+ return value;
+}
+
+char *extract_address(char *address)
+{
+ char *start, *stop, *tmp;
+
+ if((start = stop = strchr(address, '@')) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ while(start = address !isspace(*start) *start != '')
+ start--;
+
+ start++;
+
+ while(*stop !isspace(*stop) *stop != '')
+ stop++;
+
+ if((tmp = (char *)malloc(stop - start + 1)) == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
+ strncpy(tmp, start, stop - start);
+ tmp[stop-start] = '\0';
+
+ return tmp;
+}
+
/* {{{ php_mail
*/
PHPAPI int php_mail(char *to, char *subject, char *message, char
*headers, char *extra_cmd)
@@ -135,6 +214,8 @@
int ret;
char *sendmail_path = INI_STR(sendmail_path);
char *sendmail_cmd = NULL;
+ char *return_path;
+ char *address;
if (!sendmail_path) {
#ifdef PHP_WIN32
@@ -169,6 +250,25 @@
fprintf(sendmail, To: %s\n, to);
fprintf(sendmail, Subject: %s\n, subject);
if (headers != NULL) {
+
+ /* Existing Return-Path should not be overwritten */
+ if((return_path = get_header(Return-Path,
headers)) != NULL) {
+ free(return_path);
+ }
+ else {
+
+ if((return_path = get_header(From,
headers)) != NULL) {
+
+ if((address =
extract_address(return_path)) != NULL) {
+ fprintf(sendmail,
Return-Path: %s\n, address);
+ free(address);
+ }
+
+ free(return_path);
+
+ }
+ }
+
fprintf(sendmail, %s\n, headers);
}
fprintf(sendmail, \n%s\n, message);
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
Hi Andi, Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not emalloc()/efree()? Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy(). (Weird I mentioned it twice in one day :) http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html Probably there are even more things broken in my patch :) I'm quite new to C and I'm happy it works without segfaulting. strlcpy looks interesting and I'll read through the link as soon as I find some free time. Oh, this patch is explicitly *NOT* meant to go into the main branch. It's just an additional patch for whoever needs it, sorry for not pointing this out more explicitly. -daniel -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] FR: echo line
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would expand _ foo to ? foo\n?php.
Has this been requested before? If so, why it wasn't implented?
e.g.
?php
for(..) {
_ td
}
?
would echo \ttd\n to page.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] FR: echo line
Do you realize how ugly that is? What benifit would that have over something
way more readable like:
?php
for(..) {
echo \ttd\n;
}
?
-Brad
--- Jari Vuoksenranta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would expand _ foo to ? foo\n?php.
Has this been requested before? If so, why it wasn't implented?
e.g.
?php
for(..) {
_ td
}
?
would echo \ttd\n to page.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] FR: echo line
-1, no way...
-Original Message-
From: Jari Vuoksenranta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 11:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PHP-DEV] FR: echo line
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would expand _ foo to ? foo\n?php.
Has this been requested before? If so, why it wasn't implented?
e.g.
?php
for(..) {
_ td
}
?
would echo \ttd\n to page.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not emalloc()/efree()? Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy(). (Weird I mentioned it twice in one day :) http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html Probably there are even more things broken in my patch :) I'm quite new to C and I'm happy it works without segfaulting. strlcpy looks interesting and I'll read through the link as soon as I find some free time. Oh, this patch is explicitly *NOT* meant to go into the main branch. It's just an additional patch for whoever needs it, sorry for not pointing this out more explicitly. Good because I havn't seen any positive responses to this and I'm still negative on it. Apart from disagreement with the prinicipal here I'd also ask: Where is the portion of the patch to support Win32 SMTP via the MAPI interface? ((as opposed to sendmail_path interface which you've covered on all platforms)) A more generalized fix would be to append the Return-Path to the headers string at the top of the php_mail function so that it's caught by both the sendmail block and by the TSendMail call (MAPI). Any modification to behavior which effects one platform should affect all platforms equally. While Win32/sendmail is kept equal, Win32/MAPI (used by the majority of Win32 users) is not. -Pollita -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
hi, Good because I havn't seen any positive responses to this and I'm still negative on it. You don't have to use it. Apart from disagreement with the prinicipal here I'd also ask: Where is the portion of the patch to support Win32 SMTP via the MAPI interface? ((as opposed to sendmail_path interface which you've covered on all platforms)) This is not necessary, at least not with qmail. qmail-smtpd DOES already use the From-Header to write the Return-Path -- compared to qmail-inject, which DOESN'T, and instead uses a default address (such as Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]). A more generalized fix would be to append the Return-Path to the headers string at the top of the php_mail function so that it's caught by both the sendmail block and by the TSendMail call (MAPI). Any modification to behavior which effects one platform should affect all platforms equally. While Win32/sendmail is kept equal, Win32/MAPI (used by the majority of Win32 users) is not. I'm just providing a working solution to a more or less common problem. I know there are others who are having the same problem, so I am providing a solution to everyone interested. Feel free to post an improved version of my patch. Andi kindly did some code auditing, so there are many things that can be rewritten much nicer :) -daniel -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
Hi In the NEWS file for 4.3.0 there should definitly be an entry about renaming php.exe to php-cgi.exe on win32, maybe this should even be mentioned on the download page together with the release. If not, there will be many bug reports about HTTP 500 errors and premature end of script headers after having installed PHP 4.3.0 as CGI on Win32. BTW, I still don't understand why php-cli cannot be called php-cli.exe on win32. Like this, many users would guess how the problem cgi and 4.3.0 can be solved even if they don't read php-dev (or the release notes). Christoph -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
At 00:02 08.12.2002, Christoph Grottolo wrote: Hi In the NEWS file for 4.3.0 there should definitly be an entry about renaming php.exe to php-cgi.exe on win32, maybe this should even be mentioned on the download page together with the release. If not, there will be many bug reports about HTTP 500 errors and premature end of script headers after having installed PHP 4.3.0 as CGI on Win32. BTW, I still don't understand why php-cli cannot be called php-cli.exe on win32. Like this, many users would guess how the problem cgi and 4.3.0 can be solved even if they don't read php-dev (or the release notes). Christoph Simply because calling the command line interface should be easy - as easy as calling awk or perl or whatever. Every server api module like cgi must be installed, so the name does not matter there. But having long names for command line utils is a bad idea. marcus -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] CVS Account Request: haiaw
translating the documentation from english into polish -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Latest ZE2 changes
At 16:48 07.12.2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 17:02 07/12/2002, Marcus Börger wrote:
Hi Zeev,
I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way
you modified my patch:
1) private_002.phpt fails with
004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail'
in %s on line %d
004+ Fatal error: Call to public method fail::show() from context 'fail'
in /usr/src/php4-HEAD/tests/classes/private_002.php on line 18
I see the problem. It should be fixed.
Fixed now, thanks.
The new error message is wrong. We are trying to access pass::show and
not fail::show().
2) private_007.phpt and private_007b.phpt both fail with the message
Fatal error: Cannot redeclare private bar::priv() as public foo::priv()
That means the children know about their parents privates what is in
contrast to
our discussion. The reason they do is because you skipped the part of the
patch
where in zend_do_inheritance() a modified version of zend_hash_merge_ex() was
used to prevent this. But you also do not search for the private method
in the calling
scope. In other words you mainly used the first version of my patch. So i
tried to
strip down zend_hash_merge_with_argument_if() to the portion we need and
tried
to skip copying zje privates. But since privates are no longer looked up
in the
calling scope this fails.
I implement PPP in a different way altogether (it's very loosely based on
your patch, the actual implementation is very different), in order to
avoid having two hash lookups for every method call. I left a comment in
the code that says we may want to improve the error messages, but the
current implementation is quite intentional - it's much more efficient.
However this is about what i did in my first patches and gave up after
discussion with Andi.
Since he was right that the performance loss by the required checks is
outweighted by the
fact that otherwise classes know about private details of their ancestors.
And i remeber having
an agreement on this. And yes you did the execute part in another way but
until now i see
many problems in your way.
3) You left in some snippets of the 'final' patch. Does this mean we are
going to have
final? A new patch is also available.
No, we're not going to add final, at least not for now. I may have
forgotten to remove the scanner part of the patch but it's meaningless :)
Zeev
After the patches today some more things need to be revisited:
4) You allow changing the visibility. In most languages it is only allowed to
decrease the visibility or it is even disallowed. Increasing the visibility
is a
very unfamiliar feature.
5) When you look at test private_007b.phpt you will see that the wrong
method is called. This is a consequence of 2. It seems you optimized to
much.
6) zend_execute.c, line 2350 should be
if (!(EX(fbc)-op_array.fn_flags (ZEND_ACC_PROTECTED |
ZEND_ACC_PRIVATE))) {
instead of
if (EX(fbc)-op_array.fn_flags ZEND_ACC_PUBLIC) {
as we allow (fn_flags ZEND_FN_PPP_MASK) == 0 being matched to public as well.
marcus
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
At 00:35 08.12.2002, Christoph Grottolo wrote: Marcus Börger wrote: Christoph Grottolo wrote: BTW, I still don't understand why php-cli cannot be called php-cli.exe on win32. Like this, many users would guess how the problem cgi and 4.3.0 can be solved even if they don't read php-dev (or the release notes). Christoph Simply because calling the command line interface should be easy - as easy as calling awk or perl or whatever. Every server api module like cgi must be installed, so the name does not matter there. But having long names for command line utils is a bad idea. marcus I understand the reason why cli has to get a short name (the lazyness of good programmers). What i don't understand is why it has to be called php.exe. You force each and every user of php-cgi on win32 to change his webserver configuration when switching to 4.3.0. yes but they will have to touch their ini files any way. Imagine if your favorite bar would rename wodka to gin because the barmen like wodka over gin and therefore want to give wodka a shorter name. For the next couple of months they will have to explain to every gin drinker that he now gets wodka when he orders gin and to every wodka drinker that he has to order gin when he wants wodka... know what i mean? I got your point (even though your example is slightly different as we do not exchange cgi and apache verwsion here). How many bug reports do you expect? 100? 500? Yes that could happen...maybe we should have another *big* message for the configure part and a *huge* message in the release notes and news entries. marcus Christoph -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
Yes that could happen...maybe we should have another *big* message for the configure part and a *huge* message in the release notes and news entries. This is no different than when register_globals suddenly got turned off. I think a big ole' message at the end of ./configure will drastically reduce the number of problems. Also, perhaps a check could be put in the CLI version of PHP that would throw an error message if it is being used as a CGI... John -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
Marcus Börger wrote: I understand the reason why cli has to get a short name (the lazyness of good programmers). What i don't understand is why it has to be called php.exe. You force each and every user of php-cgi on win32 to change his webserver configuration when switching to 4.3.0. yes but they will have to touch their ini files any way. But not the webserver configuration. And: all the existing PHP HOWTOs will give them wrong information, some of them will never be updated... How many bug reports do you expect? 100? 500? Yes that could happen...maybe we should have another *big* message for the configure part and a *huge* message in the release notes and news entries. that's what i was asking for. Christoph -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php.exe - php-cgi.exe
On Sunday 08 December 2002 01:02, John Coggeshall wrote: I think a big ole' message at the end of ./configure will drastically reduce the number of problems. With php.exe? *g* Also, perhaps a check could be put in the CLI version of PHP that would throw an error message if it is being used as a CGI... A _meaningful_ error-message in the right place would be the right thing (tm). Too many people don't read release-notes. regards Wagner -- codito ergo sum -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Default Return-Path with mail() and qmail
At 21:06 7-12-2002, you wrote: A more generalized fix would be to append the Return-Path to the headers string at the top of the php_mail function so that it's caught by both the sendmail block and by the TSendMail call (MAPI). Setting Return-Path is useless. It's stripped by sendmail, unless it's allowed in the cf file explicetely. Same for postfix version of sendmail. You simply need to setup your mailserver correctly and php accordingly, ie: let the webserver user be allowed to use the '-f' sendmail flag and provide this in the arguments of mail() or via ini_set. In no way, should mail() by default equal the RCPT TO user to the From: header - if I would host users, I would like to know, if they start spammin' or have buggy scripts. What ever the reason - the final control of this option should remain with the mailserver administrator, not the mail user. With kind regards, Melvyn Sopacua ?php include(not_reflecting_employers_views.txt); ? -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] CVS Account Request: porcupine
I can't find the chinese document in this website. I want to know if there is somebody try to translate it to chinese. I think I can help him. I have a question are traditional chinese and simply chinese different?. I prefer traditional chinese. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
