Hello all,
Maybe I have not found its detailed description on PHP's official manual,
but PHP does allow static field inheritance. However there is a little
difference between dynamic field inheritance and static field inheritance,
as the following codes shows:
name = $name;
}
public $name
Am Freitag, 15. Mai 2009 schrieb Michael Shadle:
Hallo,
> There's gotta be a time in the natural evolution to "cut the cord" so
> to speak - Python just launched 3.0 and dropped backwards
> compatibility. Why can't PHP do the same in 6.0? :) (Or 5.3 for all I
> care. But it really should align wi
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Confusing new code is totally different from breaking existing code.
True but aren't some changes in 6.0 at least (and possibly 5.3) going
to require code changes? Or is it still going to be "legacy enough" ?
There's gotta be a time in
Hi!
If tests need fixing and you dont have the time for this, I am sure we
will find people that do.
I definitely don't have time for doing it, so I'd be happy if somebody
else does that thing.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
s...@zend.com http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829
On 15.05.2009, at 19:14, Michael Shadle wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith
wrote:
The more stuff like this we remove, the harder it becomes for
people to
quickly move to newer, faster and more secure versions of PHP. That
causes way more frustration for everyone t
Giovanni Giacobbi wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:04:36PM +0200, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> hi Ilia,
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Andrei Zmievski
>> wrote:
>>> Jani Taskinen wrote:
It's still new stuff. And we need more things in 5.3/6 to make them more
interesting to general p
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:04:36PM +0200, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi Ilia,
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Andrei Zmievski
> wrote:
> > Jani Taskinen wrote:
> >>
> >> It's still new stuff. And we need more things in 5.3/6 to make them more
> >> interesting to general populus too. ;)
> >
> > Gr
See also: http://bugs.php.net/38802
Arnaud Le Blanc kirjoitti:
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 11:49 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
the patch looks good.
Same here. Lukas, Johannes, can this be commited to 5.3 ?
Regards,
Arnaud
Ilia Alshanetsky
On 15-May-09, at 11:36 AM, Tjerk Anne Meesters
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>> The more stuff like this we remove, the harder it becomes for people to
>> quickly move to newer, faster and more secure versions of PHP. That
>> causes way more frustration for everyone than a few "ugly" legacy
>> features. If there
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 11:49 -0400, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> the patch looks good.
Same here. Lukas, Johannes, can this be commited to 5.3 ?
Regards,
Arnaud
>
>
> Ilia Alshanetsky
>
>
>
>
> On 15-May-09, at 11:36 AM, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
>
> > Hi Arnaud,
> >
> > Thanks for the ti
Simon Westcott wrote:
Hi,
I've just started to explore PHP's tests, reading through the docs on
qa.php.net, the wiki and a few blogs. Having gotten to a position where
I can run the tests and produce coverage reports I have my first
(simple) submission. It covers an edge case for array_mu
the patch looks good.
Ilia Alshanetsky
On 15-May-09, at 11:36 AM, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
Hi Arnaud,
Thanks for the tip, please find patch attached.
Best,
Tjerk
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Arnaud Le Blanc
wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 22:16 +0800, Tjerk Anne Meesters
Hi Arnaud,
Thanks for the tip, please find patch attached.
Best,
Tjerk
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 22:16 +0800, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been extending the pecl/oauth code to work with php stream
>> wrappers in
Hi Arnaud,
Thanks for the tip, please find patch attached.
Best,
Tjerk
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 22:16 +0800, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been extending the pecl/oauth code to work with php stream
>> wrappers in
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 22:16 +0800, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been extending the pecl/oauth code to work with php stream
> wrappers in cases whereby curl is not enabled, but I've hit a snag.
>
> The documentation states that enabling the "ignore_errors" flag will
> fetch the c
Hi,
I've been extending the pecl/oauth code to work with php stream
wrappers in cases whereby curl is not enabled, but I've hit a snag.
The documentation states that enabling the "ignore_errors" flag will
fetch the content even on failure status codes. At the same time,
setting "max_redirects" to
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Farley Knight
> wrote:
>
>> zend_hash_internal_pointer_reset(Z_ARRVAL(zhash));
>>
>> printf("This hash table has %d entries\n",
>> zend_hash_num_elements(Z_ARRVAL(zhash)));
>>
>> int current = 0;
>>
Lukas Kahwe Smith kirjoitti:
On 14.05.2009, at 20:56, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I think Moriyoshi has a point here there are several reports by people
who are affected by this, I think it makes sense to leave the
introduced functionality as is in 5.3/6, but for PHP 5.2 it probably
should be ro
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> On 15.05.2009 07:31, Farley Knight wrote:
>> while (zend_hash_get_current_data(Z_ARRVAL(zhash), (void**)&value)
>> == SUCCESS) {
>> current++;
>> printf("Currently on entry %d\n", current);
>> if (zend_hash_move_forward(Z_ARRVAL
Yes, why not :)
By get involved section,
i seek a guideline for contribute for each different points.
* Internal development
* References
* TSRM
* Zend Engine API
* ...
* Coding standard
* Get Started
* Features
* Bugs
* motivate ? go to seek a bug now !
Sorry Hannes - forgot to change To address!
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 21:25, Lester Caine wrote:
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 18:45, Lester Caine wrote:
Since 5.3 DOES require some work to port legacy applications over
Do you have a quick list of th
On 14.05.2009, at 20:56, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I think Moriyoshi has a point here there are several reports by
people who are affected by this, I think it makes sense to leave the
introduced functionality as is in 5.3/6, but for PHP 5.2 it probably
should be rolled back.
I talked to J
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:32, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 15.05.2009, at 10:22, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Michael Shadle wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>>
bc? all the reasoning in the world won't justify it to 1 million
businesses
runnin
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 15.05.2009, at 10:30, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> In the 5.2 release we have a very nice README.UPDATE_5_2 file that
>> explains the changes in 5.2. Could we get a volunteer to do the same
>> for 5.3 now that we are close to getting 5.3 out the door?
>>
>> I guess
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 15.05.2009, at 10:22, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Michael Shadle wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Nathan Rixham
>>> wrote:
>>>
bc? all the reasoning in the world won't justify it to 1 million
businesses
running php 4 code which is reliant
On 15.05.2009, at 10:30, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
In the 5.2 release we have a very nice README.UPDATE_5_2 file that
explains the changes in 5.2. Could we get a volunteer to do the same
for 5.3 now that we are close to getting 5.3 out the door?
I guess I could do it, but I am hoping someone alre
On 15.05.2009, at 10:22, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Michael Shadle wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Nathan Rixham
wrote:
bc? all the reasoning in the world won't justify it to 1 million
businesses
running php 4 code which is reliant on $_REQUEST behind the scenes.
although it would g
In the 5.2 release we have a very nice README.UPDATE_5_2 file that
explains the changes in 5.2. Could we get a volunteer to do the same
for 5.3 now that we are close to getting 5.3 out the door?
I guess I could do it, but I am hoping someone already has most of it
done and just hasn't committed i
Michael Shadle wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Nathan Rixham wrote:
>
>> bc? all the reasoning in the world won't justify it to 1 million businesses
>> running php 4 code which is reliant on $_REQUEST behind the scenes.
>>
>> although it would generate a tonne of freelance work :p
>
>
On 15.05.2009 07:31, Farley Knight wrote:
> while (zend_hash_get_current_data(Z_ARRVAL(zhash), (void**)&value)
> == SUCCESS) {
> current++;
> printf("Currently on entry %d\n", current);
> if (zend_hash_move_forward(Z_ARRVAL(zhash)) == SUCCESS)
> printf("Done moving hash forward.
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 21:25, Lester Caine wrote:
> Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 18:45, Lester Caine wrote:
>>> Since 5.3 DOES require some work to port legacy applications over
>>
>> Do you have a quick list of things that is required so we can document
>> them, or mayb
31 matches
Mail list logo
