Hello Andi,
Attached is the latest version of the patch and some test support files that
I had to zip up because I couldn't "cvs add" new directories.
Let me know what you think and of any improvements I could make to the code.
Thanks!
Best regards,
Jessie
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I definitely
I definitely prefer sticking to just classes as I agree this is what most
people really need it for (and it wouldn't get us into the trouble we got
into when we tried to achieve the holy grail of namespaces).
Can you please send me an updated version of the patch to review?
At 08:34 AM 8/12/200
Hi Michael,
Thanks for sending this. Has anyone else reviewed it already? I'm assuming
that this supports arrays too (unlike today as emalloc needs to be
available for arrays) and has to be created/freed during RINIT/RSHUTDOWN...
Andi
At 03:54 PM 8/12/2005 +0200, Michael Wallner wrote:
The
To echo Andi's comments on php-src, this should definitely make the
release process much easier as well as help encourage people to upgrade
their PEAR stuff more frequently.
A big thanks to Pierre and Jani for getting this done.
Ilia
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To un
Hello,
Being in a spring cleaning session, I removed pear from php-src in
HEAD, meaning php 6.0.
I will not introduce it back in any form. The README.PEAR is all I
would like to see in any future PHP distributions. Any other
solutions is impossible to manage in a safe and sane way.
As some knows
If you want to optimize then I guess "remembering" the script_encoding is
the only way to do it. We could do it similar to the way we "cache" script
file names.
Another option is to just optimize for UTF-8 and use BOMs for UTF-8/UTF-16...
Andi
At 03:09 PM 8/15/2005 -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
I think the main issue here is that if your script encoding is set to
UTF-8 and you do everything in UTF-8 then these large blocks of UTF-8
are going to make a UTF-8 -> UTF-16 -> UTF-8 conversion roundtrip on
every request. It would be nice if we could somehow avoid that.
-Rasmus
Andi Gutmans wr
Wouldn't it be easiest to have inline html become IS_UNICODE and then not
deal with the problem of remember what the script encoding was? I thought
that's what we already do today.
Andi
At 12:37 PM 8/10/2005 -0700, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
I did not have time to write the full reply earlier so
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Finally, the main issue I'm going against is the 'we can now break
> things!' approach. I don't have a problem with all of the points Rasmus
> made, just some of them. And the biggest problem is the mindset of the
> thread that followed it.
>
> Zeev
How long PHP must take
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> 9. Radically change all the operator syntaxes. Oh wait, that's Perl
> 6.0, sorry.
In the same spirit, on my PHP 7.0 wishlist are Unicode operators. :)
-adam
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.trachtenberg.com
author of o'reilly's "upgrading to
Hello David,
nice constructive helpfull work, thanks!
best regardws
marcus
Monday, August 15, 2005, 8:49:35 PM, you wrote:
> As a decreasingly "hardcore" php user, any and/or all items on Rasmus'
> wishlist would be welcome. However, to comment on two items
> The strpos/in_array argument
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:52 PM, sebastian wrote:
W4: Better lambda/anonymous functions and debugging for them.
Consider Perl's anonymous functions which disappear as the
references to them disappear. See the create_function() docs for
notes about "memory leaks."
Well, Perl subroutines are
Howdy all,
I work at a company with about 8 programmers, and after some discussion
we decided the following would be nice to add to the language:
W1: Type hints. It'd be nice if you could mark a variable as string or
int, so that if we set an int to "foozle" a warning will be raised. Of
cour
As a decreasingly "hardcore" php user, any and/or all items on Rasmus'
wishlist would be welcome. However, to comment on two items
The strpos/in_array argument swap is one of my greatest joys in PHP. It
keeps it lively. So I did a quick grep of the manual for "needle/haystack"
type functions,
At 19:16 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Marc Richards wrote:
> I read a bunch of other mailing-lists on a daily basis using Gmane that
> I don't actually send replies to. I am not necessarily trying to refute
> your point, just saying that there may be things you hadn't considered.
You don't
At 19:09 15/08/2005, Marc Richards wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developer
At 18:55 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:52 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's exactly what I was saying (in another part of the email).
It doesn't work in reverse order though - being on one of these
lists does usually mean that the developer is more 'hardcore' than
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> to prevent confusion with more readers - i am against an ini option here.
> Either keep the way it is right now or make everything case sensitive.
> And of course i like speed which is support for the latter to be clear.
What about deprecating case-insensitive identifiers
Marc Richards wrote:
> I read a bunch of other mailing-lists on a daily basis using Gmane that
> I don't actually send replies to. I am not necessarily trying to refute
> your point, just saying that there may be things you hadn't considered.
You don't need to subscribe to post. The first time y
Marc Richards wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually g
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> w
Interesting point of view. I'd consider the majority of people on generals@
to be less "hardcore" and "pro" and more "beginner" like, since they're
usually coming there to ask questions. Hardcore PHP users needn't subscribe
to generals@ since they don't need to ask questions. Makes sense?
- David
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Wez Furlong wrote:
> On 8/15/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Where does using case sensitive identifiers fall?
>
> As something of a dream, without the additional infrastructure that
> George described.
>
> Personally, I don't really mind if we get case sensi
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:52 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's exactly what I was saying (in another part of the email).
It doesn't work in reverse order though - being on one of these
lists does usually mean that the developer is more 'hardcore' than
others.
Have you seen Harold and Kumar G
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
If apc comes bundled then it includes apc_store() and apc_fetch
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> wrong - it's 99.84%, not
At 18:45 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening nu
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> wrong - it's 99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
Not sure where you get your n
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
wrong - it's 99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between 500,000
to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number wrong - it's
99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
Zeev
At 18:29 15/08/2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Joch
On 8/15/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where does using case sensitive identifiers fall?
As something of a dream, without the additional infrastructure that
George described.
Personally, I don't really mind if we get case sensitivity or not; the
other items on Rasmus' list all seem
Jochem,
Even though you position yourself as a 'mere mortal' developer, you happen
to be subscribed on [EMAIL PROTECTED] That alone makes you much more 'hardcore
PHPer' than 98.5% to 99.96% of the PHP developer community (*). You're
much closer to the 'elitist oligarchy' than to the masses.
loose comments, by no means aimed at Sara (who I happen to hold in high
regard for not only here coding skills but also here general manner)
Sara Golemon wrote:
You and the rest of the people on internals@ are not the masses nor do
they represent them in any way. When a 'non-contributor' dares
On Aug 15, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I agree that ensuring a migration
path is critical. Wez and I were discussing this in the car this
morning, and short of magic_quoutes_runtime, they all seemed like
they were straightforward to handle through am include (except for
the paramete
You and the rest of the people on internals@ are not the masses nor do
they represent them in any way. When a 'non-contributor' dares to voice
an opinion, he's shut up because he's, well, a non-contributor. He's the
one that matters, though, not you.
PHP doesn't need to be a true-democracy (
At 16:36 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 5:05 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's an excellent response. If one percent of the energy put
into the 'yay parade' and the 'let's break this too!' parade were
invested in coming up with a clean upgrade path, I wouldn't have
ha
At 16:47 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> > I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
>>
>> http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
>>
>> In a reply directly to you. You even
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
If apc comes bundled then it includes apc_store() and apc_fetch
() this
is pretty much $_MEM
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> > I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
>>
>> http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
>>
>> In a reply directly to you. You even replied to it and quoted from it.
>
> Emm y
At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
In a reply directly to you. You even replied to it and quoted from it.
Emm yes, before I wrote my first reply, of cour
On Aug 15, 2005, at 5:05 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's an excellent response. If one percent of the energy put
into the 'yay parade' and the 'let's break this too!' parade were
invested in coming up with a clean upgrade path, I wouldn't have
had to write the response I wrote.
Would i
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
In a reply directly to you. You even replied to it and quoted from it.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: htt
At 13:07 15/08/2005, Jani Taskinen wrote:
First: Where can I get that stuff you're smoking? :)
I think you know the Lebanese drug routes better than I do ;)
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
upgrade path that does not include auditing their entire codebase. Yes,
a script in user
Hi,
On Sunday 14 August 2005 16:50, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >1. Remove register_globals completely
> >
> >2. Remove magic_quotes_*
>
> Given what I said above, I don't see any motivation to remove
> register_globals or magic_quotes. I don't see how it buys us anything
> other than pissed off users
Derick Rethans wrote:
Yeah, that sounds like a really good idea to postpone PHP 6 for another
3 years. ;-)
I know you were joking, but DO WE REALLY WANT THREE VERSIONS OF PHP on
the go ? We need a roadmap to ONE version - don't we?
Having the suggestions collected (either in separate text fi
Zeev Suraski wrote:
I think you have some good ideas in that list, and some less good
ideas. I'm worried about the wholesale mode that internals@ switched
into, the almost unanimous "YES!" response, and the overall feeling that
suddenly with 6.0 breakage comes without a price. That goes cou
Lukas Smith schrieb:
> I dont think we really need PEPr for this.
Text files in CVS are fine by me, too.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Develo
First: Where can I get that stuff you're smoking? :)
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
upgrade path that does not include auditing their entire codebase. Yes, a
script in userspace (bundled and without dependencies) is acceptable.
extract() was already mentioned (by Rasmus eve
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > Not
> >supporting him here in getting rid of this extremely (off-by default)
> >horrid feature is definitely the way forward.
>
> I think you negated yourself once too many :)
No, one time to less ;-) -> "...is definitely NOT the way forward."
Derick
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Zeev Suraski schrieb:
That was a stupid response, Jani.
Maybe we should collect and publish (with a PEPr-like system, for
instance) the suggestions that came up in this way-too-long thread and
let the php-general readers comment/vote on them.
Having the suggest
agreed, but the point was more about the implementation than how the mode is
set. a function call is good enough for me.
clayton
"Derick Rethans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Andrei,
>> it was controlled by
At 12:29 15/08/2005, Derick Rethans wrote:
I think changing register_globals to a different name is a silly idea.
You're only making things harder here. Perhaps you forgot that Rasmus
was always advocating that register globals is a good thing, but now he
actually wants to get rid of it after he
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 20:52 14/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> >Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > > If we are to do anything about register_globals, perhaps we can change
> > > the name of the directive to something else (e.g. unprotected_globals),
> > > and of course keep its defau
Derick Rethans wrote:
I think we shouldn't go overboard with all the suggestions. We do want
to ship the Unicode PHP this year - and just focussing on Rasmus'
initial list seems the best way to me.
I agree that the whole discussion went a bit overboard but on the other
hand while Rasmus' list
Zeev Suraski wrote:
If we are to continue with that idea, we need to strike that one out
completely. Instead, we need to come up with clear instructions on how
to upgrade without forcing people to audit their applications. Your
letter is a good first step. It's very much contradictory to th
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Zeev Suraski schrieb:
> > That was a stupid response, Jani.
>
> Maybe we should collect and publish (with a PEPr-like system, for
> instance) the suggestions that came up in this way-too-long thread and
> let the php-general readers comment/vote
At 20:52 14/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> If we are to do anything about register_globals, perhaps we can change
> the name of the directive to something else (e.g. unprotected_globals),
> and of course keep its default 0. Admins will have to make an informed
> decision to
Zeev Suraski schrieb:
> That was a stupid response, Jani.
Maybe we should collect and publish (with a PEPr-like system, for
instance) the suggestions that came up in this way-too-long thread and
let the php-general readers comment/vote on them.
Having the suggestions collected (either in sepa
At 20:08 14/08/2005, Lukas Smith wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Even if we forget about the users, and only think about ourselves -
unless something drastic happens, we're going to look at supporting 4
major different versions simultaneously - 4.3/4.4, 5.0, 5.1 and 6.0. Is
it really such a great
At 23:16 14/08/2005, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
worried about the wholesale mode that internals@ switched into, the
almost unanimous "YES!" response, and the overall feeling that suddenly
with 6.0
Good. Phear the masses. It's not your vote that counts a
Just my 2 cents :
9. I don't know current status of apache_hooks
(http://cvs.php.net/php-src/sapi/apache_hooks/) but it would be nice to
make it stable with good documentation on php.net
10. make standarts for function's names.
For example php has str_replace() and strpos(). I think last func
PHP 5 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (364 total including feature requests)
===[*General Issues]==
27372 Verified parse error loading browscap.ini at apache startup (new parser
required)
===
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Andrei,
> it was controlled by an ini setting. there are certain APIs that take or
> return offsets, so translation
If it's an INI setting then it hurts portability. I definitely do not
want that to happen as this would revert the *whole* shebang
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (650 total including feature requests)
===[Arrays related]===
31114 Assigned foreach modify array
===[CGI related]
64 matches
Mail list logo
