It seems that in contrast with a lot of people on this list, I don't preach
a "standard" way of doing things. What I do believe is that, in the end, it
is the programmer's choice. I for one won't use namespaces that much if I
can't have more than one in the same file. Using an inductive logic, I g
Nicolas Bérard-Nault schrieb:
> +1 for braces around namespace definition.
-0 on that, because there is no clear "standard" with regard to how
other programming languages solve this.
Java does not require braces with its "package" construct [1] and C#
does for its "namespace" construct [2].
Hello,
The php bug site told me to send bugs to internals mailing list for
HEAD compile errors, so I hope I am doing this right.
I was trying to compile php6 on my system to test out a few scripts
with it.
I was able to configure it after I installed the ICU library with this:
./configure --p
> Note that what you are saving by combining the files into one is just a
> single stat syscall per file. And that can be alleviated by setting
> apc.stat=0 in your config. That of course means you need to restart
> your server or flush your cache whenever you want to update the files.
> In apc.s
Stefan Priebsch wrote:
> Hi Ramus,
>
> Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
>> Note that what you are saving by combining the files into one is just a
>> single stat syscall per file. And that can be alleviated by setting
>> apc.stat=0 in your config. That of course means you need to restart
>> your server o
+1 for braces around namespace definition.
Personally I'm not really convinced that imposing a coding standard we see
as clean/more acceptable is really useful in that case.
On 7/7/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Stefan Priebsch wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> A
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Stefan Priebsch wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> Allowing only one namespace per file is a clean concept which I like
> very much. I have a use case for putting multiple namespaces into one
> file, though.
>
> OOP-PHP applications are usually one class per file with conditional
> l
Marco wrote:
>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
>
>
> I think we have all asked that very same question and the answer is a mix
> of a few standard issues. The hard part has always been deciding how to
> move it forward. Without the customers demanding chang
Hi Ramus,
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
> Note that what you are saving by combining the files into one is just a
> single stat syscall per file. And that can be alleviated by setting
> apc.stat=0 in your config. That of course means you need to restart
> your server or flush your cache whenever you w
Stefan Priebsch wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> Allowing only one namespace per file is a clean concept which I like
> very much. I have a use case for putting multiple namespaces into one
> file, though.
>
> OOP-PHP applications are usually one class per file with conditional
> loading. This does not pl
Stefan Priebsch schrieb:
> Is there a chance to add a PHP function that returns a "fully
> qualified" name for a given name (thus letting the engine do the
> expansion, which would ensure that correct rules are used)?
This is part of the functionality that needs to be, IMHO, added to the
Refle
Sebastian Bergmann schrieb:
> Why not "expand" namespaces during these step? The resulting file would
> then have either only one namespace or no namespace at all.
A good idea, but (much) more work of course, since it requires parsing
and rewriting every file. And I am not sure, if this really w
Vesselin Kenashkov schrieb:
> announcement for EOL on the php.net) the php4 users to upgrade directly to
> php6. This way the php6 adoption could be much faster than php5 one.
> So please give your opinions on this.
I'd say this is not a good idea because PHP6 will/should/hopefully does
introduce
Stefan Priebsch schrieb:
> I am working on gluing together all files of a project into one large
> source file on deployment
Why not "expand" namespaces during these step? The resulting file would
then have either only one namespace or no namespace at all.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
See below:
> -Original Message-
> From: Jani Taskinen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 6:01 AM
> To: Andi Gutmans
> Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RIP PHP 4?
>
> Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > I'd suggest something close to what Rasmus suggest
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'd suggest something close to what Rasmus suggested:
> a) We make a clear statement on PHP.net that at the end of the year we
> plan to discontinue bug fixes for PHP 4 except for security fixes.
> b) We will discontinue supporting PHP 4 on 8/8/8 (because
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.1/889 - Release Date: 7/6/2007 8:00 PM
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
My thought about php4->php6 migration was that when php6 is out to
encourage (or more correctly said almost enforce - with the proper
announcement for EOL on the php.net) the php4 users to upgrade directly to
php6. This way the php6 adoption could be much faster than php5 one.
It will be just obv
On 7/7/07, Johannes Schlüter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 11:00 +0300, Vesselin Kenashkov wrote:
> I can not find the specific message...
> But googling I found this:
>
http://www.nexen.net/chiffres_cles/phpversion/php_stats_evolution_for_november_2006.php
> So as of nov
Andi Gutmans wrote:
I'd suggest something close to what Rasmus suggested:
a) We make a clear statement on PHP.net that at the end of the year we
plan to discontinue bug fixes for PHP 4 except for security fixes.
b) We will discontinue supporting PHP 4 on 8/8/8 (because it sounds good
and gives pe
Hi,
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 11:00 +0300, Vesselin Kenashkov wrote:
> I can not find the specific message...
> But googling I found this:
> http://www.nexen.net/chiffres_cles/phpversion/php_stats_evolution_for_november_2006.php
> So as of november 2006 the php5 adoption was slightly above 12%. Havin
On 7/6/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ladies, Gentlemen, Kings and Princesses,
With the nice PHP 5 / PHP 6 unicode semantics thread under way I am
trying to gauge what people feel about dropping support for PHP 4 at the
end of this year. That does not mean that we will not fix sec
Hi Dmitry,
Allowing only one namespace per file is a clean concept which I like
very much. I have a use case for putting multiple namespaces into one
file, though.
OOP-PHP applications are usually one class per file with conditional
loading. This does not play well with caching. I am working on g
2007/7/7, Vesselin Kenashkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So as of november 2006 the php5 adoption was slightly above 12%. Having the
time passed since (and looking on the graphics - 8% per year), we can guess
that now it is close to 20%.
well done, you guessed it right. see the same stats for june:
On 7/6/07, Oliver Block <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Vesselin,
what is the source of your numbers?
Best Regards,
Oliver
Vesselin Kenashkov schrieb:
> -1
> Because the majority of the installation (somebody two month ago in this
> list mentioned that php 5 has just 10% adoption) is still
25 matches
Mail list logo
