Hi All,
Trying to ready myself for some possible work w/the core (after I
resurrect all my never-that-great C, heh), I went looking for a recent
book. (I still like old-school supplements.)
I see Sara's from 2006 on Amazon, but nothing after that under 'PHP
internals'. I'm sure that one's not tot
Please read my previous comment.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Clint Priest wrote:
> How would one use your Castable interface to cast a Class “Test” to any
> of integer, array or boolean?
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, May 14, 2012 12:
How would one use your Castable interface to cast a Class "Test" to any of
integer, array or boolean?
From: Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 12:19 PM
To: Clint Priest
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Custom Casting
My pastbin is for ca
I am interested in preserving the complete PHP context for a thread (globals,
variables, interpreter, etc.--everything) for later access from a different
thread.
What would be involved in this? It seems like:
1) Avoid calling ts_free_thread
2) Call tsrm_set_interpreter_context from new thread
Thanks.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Not quite. The proposed is a syntactic sugar which is thought to handle
> > any transformation of a value, not necessarily or limited to type or
> > class conversion. It is of course possible to limit the usage to just
> >
Hi!
> I had a look around the various php.net sites but didn't really find
> much in the way of guidelines to get involved, code wise, or suggestions
> as to low hanging fruit that wouldn't be too painful to start on. If
> someone could point me in the right direction it would be much
> appreciate
Hi!
> Not quite. The proposed is a syntactic sugar which is thought to handle
> any transformation of a value, not necessarily or limited to type or
> class conversion. It is of course possible to limit the usage to just
> that, with any user defined convention or "best practice". In fact it's
> p
My pastbin is for casting anything to anything.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Clint Priest wrote:
> Both of the RFC's you reference are for casting TO a scalar, not TO an
> object type. Your pastbin is for casting FROM a scalar TO an object.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Seva Lapsha
Both of the RFC's you reference are for casting TO a scalar, not TO an object
type. Your pastbin is for casting FROM a scalar TO an object.
-Original Message-
From: Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 6:18 AM
To: Clint Priest
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
On Mon, 14 May 2012 15:41:25 +0200, Paul Dragoonis
wrote:
Gustavo, why would I use array_part() if I could use array_slice() to get
the parts of an array between two offsets.
Obviously, if you want to do something that array_slice() already does,
then you wouldn't have a lot of pressing
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi Gustavo,
>
> I would add some examples inline in the RFC, with explanation, to ease
> the comprehension of this new function and its possibility. The
> current RFC is somehow hard to digest :)
>
Yes, that's what I was meaning earlier but w
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Miah Gregory wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> The recent suhosin 'discussions' and subsequent browsing of various
> mailing lists prompted me into looking at doing some core
> development/bug fixing/whatever, since I have a vested interest as a
> user.
>
> I had a look aroun
hi Gustavo,
I would add some examples inline in the RFC, with explanation, to ease
the comprehension of this new function and its possibility. The
current RFC is somehow hard to digest :)
Cheers,
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 13:23:27 +0200, Paul D
Hi,
Not quite. The proposed is a syntactic sugar which is thought to handle any
transformation of a value, not necessarily or limited to type or class
conversion. It is of course possible to limit the usage to just that, with
any user defined convention or "best practice". In fact it's pretty
dist
On Mon, 14 May 2012 13:23:27 +0200, Paul Dragoonis
wrote:
Am i correct in assuming this is basically substr() for arrays.
No. That's a part of it. It also does indexes as keys (like array_slice)
and multidimensional arrays, none of which have anything analogous in
strings.
--
Gustavo
Hi there,
The recent suhosin 'discussions' and subsequent browsing of various
mailing lists prompted me into looking at doing some core
development/bug fixing/whatever, since I have a vested interest as a
user.
I had a look around the various php.net sites but didn't really find
much in the way o
Hey,
Am i correct in assuming this is basically substr() for arrays.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 12:26:11 +0200, Paul Dragoonis
> wrote:
>
> Can you please add some code examples on the RFC, that get outputted as
>> tags.
>>
>> Ideally demonstr
Sorry, I comprehend neither the cause nor the effect in your argument
statement. Can you please elaborate?
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Clint Priest wrote:
> This has already been covered quite a bit, the problem with your
> suggestion is that the compiler needs to determine the type it is c
Pierre,
>> AFAIK 2 of the people voting "both" (myself included) already said they
>> are OK with "empty only".
>
> If the other one can raise his voice, then we are good.
I had meant to reply to the list, but I had replied to Stas directly.
I would be happy to change my vote from isset() and emp
On Mon, 14 May 2012 12:26:11 +0200, Paul Dragoonis
wrote:
Can you please add some code examples on the RFC, that get outputted as
tags.
Ideally demonstrating var_dump() output to inspect the return value of
your
new function to get a clear indication of the input, and resulting
output.
Can you please add some code examples on the RFC, that get outputted as
tags.
Ideally demonstrating var_dump() output to inspect the return value of your
new function to get a clear indication of the input, and resulting output.
- Paul.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
>
Hi
I have a proposal to add a new function to ext/standard: array_part():
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_part
Comments would be very welcome, especially the constructive kind.
Please keep this on topic. In particular, avoid proposing new syntax as
I'm not interested in that. You can of cours
hi Stas,
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> As Stas suggested earlier, it would help if you can convince one
>> person having voted none or both to choose the empty only option, then
>> you should be good. It is not that good in general, but for 1/3 of a
>> voice for
Hi!
> Or simply don't have voting rights ...
> Personally I would prefer to see 'empty()' remain limited to real variables.
AFAIK all committers have voting rights on wiki.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
--
PHP Internals - PH
Stas Malyshev wrote:
> The PHP group is totally irrelevant in this process, with all due
> respect. It is about php.net developers.
Which is what I meant - most of the developers (or committers) did not
vote at all.
Or simply don't have voting rights ...
Personally I would prefer to see 'empt
Hi!
> The PHP group is totally irrelevant in this process, with all due
> respect. It is about php.net developers.
Which is what I meant - most of the developers (or committers) did not
vote at all.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 2
Hi!
> As Stas suggested earlier, it would help if you can convince one
> person having voted none or both to choose the empty only option, then
> you should be good. It is not that good in general, but for 1/3 of a
> voice for something like that ... :)
AFAIK 2 of the people voting "both" (myself
27 matches
Mail list logo