> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier Hill [mailto:olivier.h...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 10:15 AM
> To: Derick Rethans
> Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 6
>
> We need to focus on Unicode more than what some says, whether this
> means descoping
> -Original Message-
> From: Antony Dovgal [mailto:t...@daylessday.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 2:25 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.4 branch and trunk
>
> On 03/16/2010 07:13 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >> + merge php-fpm branch?
> >
> > Can't see
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Christopher Jones
wrote:
>
>
> Stanley Sufficool wrote:
>> I have attached patches for bug # 50755 on bugs.php.net. These also
>> cleanup to PDO DBLIB code to have less of a memory footprint and to
>> prepare for other feature additions such as multiple rowset supp
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 22:12, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 16.03.2010, at 19:23, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>
>> You didn't even list the mbstring patch.. that was discussed and as
>> far as I remember everyone thought it was great idea, just not in a
>> stable branch.
>
>
> Is this tone really n
Hi:
On 13 Mar 2010, at 00:37, Chris Trahey wrote:
> Perhaps a new concept in class-based OO programming, I'm not sure.
> Depending on your perspective you could call it ancestor overloading (or
> upstream overloading) or class underloading.
Haven't read the term in this thread yet, so I felt obli
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:40 PM, mathieu.suen
wrote:
> Ionut G. Stan wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is interesting and it appears the following change makes the snippet
>> work as expected:
>>
>> public function &__get($name);
>
>
> I think is that the $this->anArray['bar'] = 4;
>
> Genera
Sorry for duplicate message- mail server fail.
Chris Trahey
Web Applications Developer
Database Administrator
College Station I.S.D.
On Mar 12, 2010, at 5:37 PM, "Chris Trahey" wrote:
Perhaps a new concept in class-based OO programming, I'm not sure.
Depending on your perspective you could ca
Perhaps a new concept in class-based OO programming, I'm not sure.
Depending on your perspective you could call it ancestor overloading (or
upstream overloading) or class underloading.
We are increasingly developing with the aid of frameworks & libraries. In
fact, this idea came from my current pr
Update: http://phpbenelux.eu/array_seek-return.patch.txt
I've kept the fseek()-style return values (0 when fine, -1 when seek fails)
Any reason why you picked that over the (IMO more logical) true/false
approach?
No, just to keep it similar to fseek(). Either way works for me.
I would expect
On 17-mrt-2010, at 19:09, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
>
>> On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:52, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
>>>
On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:27, Frederic Hardy wrote:
>
> Why not use arrayIterat
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon
wrote:
>
> On 12 Mar 2010, at 20:15, Philip Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
Yeah.
We tried it, and it simply didn't pan out (performance, bc, lost
interest, ..).
>>>
>>> I
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
> On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:52, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
> >
> >> On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:27, Frederic Hardy wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Why not use arrayIterator::seek() ?
> >>
> >> Because the functionality isn't
On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:52, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
>
>> On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:27, Frederic Hardy wrote:
>>>
>>> Why not use arrayIterator::seek() ?
>>
>> Because the functionality isn't exactly the same.
>> ArrayIterator::seek() only sets the array
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
> On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:27, Frederic Hardy wrote:
> >
> > Why not use arrayIterator::seek() ?
>
> Because the functionality isn't exactly the same.
> ArrayIterator::seek() only sets the array pointer, array_seek would
> also return the value + have
On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:27, Frederic Hardy wrote:
>
> Hello Felix !
>
> Why not use arrayIterator::seek() ?
>
> Best regards,
> Fred
Because the functionality isn't exactly the same. ArrayIterator::seek() only
sets the array pointer, array_seek would also return the value + have
fseek()-like fu
> Hi Patrick
>
> That's of course possible, but that would only allow seeking to a relative
> position to where the array pointer is at that moment. The functionality also
> gets a bit ambiguous by adding an optional parameter. You're not going to the
> next or prev position of the array anymore
2010/3/16 Felix De Vliegher :
Hi all
I recently needed seek functionality in arrays, and couldn't find it in the
regular set of array functions, so I wrote a function for it. (Seek = getting
an array value based on the position (or offset, if you want to call it like
that), and not the key of
On 12 Mar 2010, at 20:15, Philip Olson wrote:
On Mar 12, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Yeah.
We tried it, and it simply didn't pan out (performance, bc, lost
interest, ..).
I think it is a bit premature to declare the death of Unicode in
PHP. Yes, we know there are
On 12 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On 03/12/2010 12:29 PM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:18, Jani Taskinen
wrote:
Having tests in multiple branches is PITA. Hasn't anyone
considered that the
best way would be to move all tests into their own repository
(di
On 12 Mar 2010, at 20:23, Pierre Joye wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Alexey Zakhlestin
wrote:
On 12.03.2010, at 22:06, Pierre Joye wrote:
Many tests fail because they are written for a given platform, or
even
worst (from a portability point of view), only for a given
configurat
On 12 Mar 2010, at 23:33, Jani Taskinen wrote:
13.3.2010 0:18, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
There are going to be some technical challenges. Some (maybe a
lot) of
test
will need updates or rewriting. run-tests.php may need more
improvements
than what is already planned. Knowing this, I
On 17-mrt-2010, at 17:00, Patrick ALLAERT wrote:
> 2010/3/16 Felix De Vliegher :
>> Hi all
>>
>> I recently needed seek functionality in arrays, and couldn't find it in the
>> regular set of array functions, so I wrote a function for it. (Seek =
>> getting an array value based on the position (
2010/3/16 Felix De Vliegher :
> Hi all
>
> I recently needed seek functionality in arrays, and couldn't find it in the
> regular set of array functions, so I wrote a function for it. (Seek = getting
> an array value based on the position (or offset, if you want to call it like
> that), and not t
Hi,
I do not claim to be able to add anything to the discussion content-wise, but
organizational-wise (just invented this word for no good reason), it seems that
while the brainstorming is useful, I urge people to start structuring their
ideas and proposals so that they can reference it later a
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 04:07:36PM +0100, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> Please double check what the patch does, test it, and think again
> about this question (hint: pos != key) :)
And once again, skimming emails (can you say ADD? I knew you could.)
bites me in the tush. :) I just looked at the first
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Daniel Convissor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 06:53:49PM -0500, Eric Stewart wrote:
> >
> > If I'm given the choice of those differences being in one file or in three
> > different files (5.2, 5.3, 6.0)? I choose one file. Even if that files is
> > more complex. It's stil
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > Does that mean you want to take up a
> > - strict RFC-and-after-3months-discussion-before-commit policy
> >(i.e. killing the scratching-an-itch spirit of PHP)
> > - "I'm going to commit this patch tomorrow" mail to internals@
> >(i.e.
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Daniel Convissor wrote:
> > $input = array(3, 'bar', 'baz');
> > echo array_seek($input, 2); // returns 'baz'
> > echo array_seek($input, 0); // returns 3
> > echo array_seek($input, 5); // returns NULL, emits an out of range warning
>
> Why waste time calling a function when
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Daniel Convissor
wrote:
> Hi:
>
>> $input = array(3, 'bar', 'baz');
>> echo array_seek($input, 2); // returns 'baz'
>> echo array_seek($input, 0); // returns 3
>> echo array_seek($input, 5); // returns NULL, emits an out of range warning
>
> Why waste time calling
Hi:
> $input = array(3, 'bar', 'baz');
> echo array_seek($input, 2); // returns 'baz'
> echo array_seek($input, 0); // returns 3
> echo array_seek($input, 5); // returns NULL, emits an out of range warning
Why waste time calling a function when this can be done right now by
acting on the array i
Ionut G. Stan wrote:
Hi,
This is interesting and it appears the following change makes the
snippet work as expected:
public function &__get($name);
I think is that the $this->anArray['bar'] = 4;
Generate the following bytcode:
0 FETCH_OBJ_W $0
Hi,
This is interesting and it appears the following change makes the
snippet work as expected:
public function &__get($name);
On 3/17/10 3:55 PM, mathieu.suen wrote:
Hi,
I came across a strange behavior when using the magic method __get and
some instance variable that should be an ar
Hi,
I came across a strange behavior when using the magic method __get and
some instance variable that should be an array.
Consider the following example:
class A
{
public function __get($name)
{
$this->$name = array();
return $this->$name;
}
public function test(
2010/3/16 Alexey Zakhlestin
> you missed it again, because THIS message is directed only to you :-)
> make sure proper CC header is set before clicking "Send"
>
> 2010/3/16 Ян Программист :
> > It is a PHP 5 library. In most cases it could be based on simplexml.
> > But for better architecture -
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> On 03/16/2010 07:13 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>> + merge php-fpm branch?
>>
>> Can't see why not. Is there an RFC for this?
>
> No, there are no RFCs on that.
> Just copy sapi/fpm to 5_4 and you've merged it.
There is no 5.4 either, trunk
On 03/16/2010 07:13 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>> + merge php-fpm branch?
>
> Can't see why not. Is there an RFC for this?
No, there are no RFCs on that.
Just copy sapi/fpm to 5_4 and you've merged it.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
---
http://pinba.org - realtime statistics for PHP
--
PHP Internals -
On 17 March 2010 16:50, Jan Schneider wrote:
> How about 5.3.99? A lot of projects use this for pre-releases, but it still
> might make sense.
I'm wary of sticking with anything starting with 5.3 if we're going to
break binary compatibility on the new trunk (which we presumably are)
— it undermin
Zitat von Johannes Schlüter :
On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 22:13 +0100, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 16.03.2010, at 16:58, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Before we add features, they need to be discussed whether we want to
> have them. As version name for it I would like to use "trunk-dev" (and
> not 5.4-dev
38 matches
Mail list logo
