Sara Golemon wrote:
Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
extension, I have run into trouble. I have declared a function as follows:
...
Unfortunately, $x now contains a 'pig' key and the non-existent $y has
been transformed into an object:
Short answer: No. What you're
> Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
> extension, I have run into trouble. I have declared a function as
follows:
>
> Unfortunately, $x now contains a 'pig' key and the non-existent $y has
> been transformed into an object:
>
Short answer: No. What you're trying to do c
On 5/27/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Rasmus, helly list,
So my advise is to specify a commit date, say tuesday or
wednesday next week and commit if no real aregument against is brought up by
now. How about that?
Fine, as long as it works nicelly with Unicode.
p.s.: to l
Hello Zeev,
actually there was plenty of discussion prior to selecting the summer
of code projects. Nonetheless we will see how it will work out. For example
#line can easily be aded to the lexer already and doesn't
require a full blown preprocessor. Versioning is very different since it
shoul
Hello D.,
you are looking for ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_INFO_EX(), the names of the macro
parameters are self speaking.
best regards
marcus
Friday, May 26, 2006, 10:45:19 PM, you wrote:
> All,
> Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
> extension, I have run into trouble. I hav
Hello Rasmus, helly list,
i can only agree to this. People do not care unless they are affected. I
am quite sure noone ever had a peep into this patch of which the first
version are out since weeks. The idea is generally good and making the ob
facility maintainable again is imo worth a bit of a
Pierre wrote:
On Fri, 26 May 2006 15:45:19 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("D. Dante Lorenso") wrote:
Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
extension, I have run into trouble. I have declared a function as
follows:
It is perfectly normal and desired.
Not desired.
On 5/26/06, D. Dante Lorenso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is perfectly normal and desired.
>
Not desired.
It is by design.
> The variable is fetched before entering your function. This fetch
> operation raises a E_NOTICE, create/initialize the ZVAL and pass it to
> your function.
>
You
On Fri, 26 May 2006 15:45:19 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("D. Dante Lorenso") wrote:
> All,
>
> Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
> extension, I have run into trouble. I have declared a function as
> follows:
It is perfectly normal and desired.
The variable is fetched
All,
Back on the topic of trying to write a 'filled' function in an
extension, I have run into trouble. I have declared a function as follows:
-- 8< 8< --
static
ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_INFO(all_args_prefer_ref, ZEND_SEND_PREFER_REF)
ZEND_END_ARG_INFO
It was part of the overall 5.2 change list that was sent to internals
before the 5.2 was branched.
Ilia Alshanetsky
On 25-May-06, at 10:14 PM, Wez Furlong wrote:
FWIW, I don't remember a discussion on this for PHP 5 either.
--Wez.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
T
Like I said on irc, I think getting this into HEAD is the only way for
us to have any chance of figuring out what might be affected by it.
-Rasmus
Michael Wallner wrote:
Hi,
After receiving some positive words to go ahead on IRC, I finished
porting the output control implementation to HEAD.
Hi,
After receiving some positive words to go ahead on IRC, I
finished porting the output control implementation to HEAD.
If there are no further objections, I'm going to commit
soonish, so it can be tested.
Patch:
http://dev.iworks.at/PATCHES/output/ob-HEAD.txt
References:
http://marc.the
On Fri, 26 May 2006 09:14:30 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
> On Thu, 25 May 2006, Pierre wrote:
>
> > On 5/25/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > I do not want to take unilateral decisions but I do want the
> > > > best possible extension.
> > >
> >
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Marcus,
For the sake of world peace, let's say you're absolutely right. Let's
be done with this compat mode case study.
The important point is for the future - announce compatibility breaking
changes (removal of features, major changes to features) clearly on
internals@
Hi,
I'm starting on a pg_real_escape_string and pg_real_escape_bytea
function for PostgreSQL, based on this security release:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs.49
Is anyone else working on it, or is it fine that I do it? I'll let you
know if it's going to take me too long.
Basically
You mean for PHP 6? IIRC it was discussed in the Paris meeting,
which were published and discussed... I wasn't in favour of removing
it, but I think it's less of an issue with PHP 6 than it is with PHP 5.
Zeev
At 05:14 26/05/2006, Wez Furlong wrote:
FWIW, I don't remember a discussion on th
Yeah I heard, but it doesn't mean it'll become a part of the language
(doesn't mean that it would not, but as usual, no discussion ;).
What Alan suggested is already a part of the language, bares no
additional overhead (both CPU cycles and brain cycles), and also
(least important point) is ver
Marcus,
For the sake of world peace, let's say you're absolutely
right. Let's be done with this compat mode case study.
The important point is for the future - announce compatibility
breaking changes (removal of features, major changes to features)
clearly on internals@, in a dedicated emai
Hello Robert,
when we first wrote the 6.0 list we were barely at 5.1. When we started
to work towards 5.2 we came up with a new list.
Friday, May 26, 2006, 5:38:55 AM, you wrote:
> I can't find any references to a discussion on this either.
Once again it was on the list and nobody was interes
Hello Steph,
i somehow get really nervous and sober on this. Please don't force
your point of view over everybody and please don't let your view be
guided by your mail filters. It has been announced long enough. And
everybody was free to reply to this.
Friday, May 26, 2006, 7:04:08 AM, you wrot
On Thu, 25 May 2006, Pierre wrote:
> On 5/25/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I do not want to take unilateral decisions but I do want the
> > > best possible extension.
> >
> > You're making those anyway as you're committing patches that you *know*
> > I was opposed to witho
22 matches
Mail list logo
