Not sure,
I tried something locally and this is what i came up with (and what i think
expected behaviour could be)
wrote:
> I agree, PHP should have world-class support for v6. What is your proposal
> exactly?
>
> Am 27.03.2013 um 13:39 schrieb Sam Hermans :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The rcf howto pu
On 03/27/2013 09:35 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> We have done that many times in the past for 5.3 and 5.4. It is
> relatively risk free. Even more for 5.5 during beta phase. It does not
> add new features but fixes bugs.
>
> The good side effect is that we can test it well with 5.5 and back
> port to
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Michael Wallner wrote:
> providing DateTimeImmutable as a sibling to DateTime.
That's fine with me, but I am not having the time to work on a patch
right now.
cheers,
Derick
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:29 PM, David Soria Parra wrote:
> On 03/26/2013 11:44 PM, Anatol Belski wrote:
>> What +/- I personally see upgrading this at this time:
>>
>> contra:
>> - there might be bugs, the next release might have not all them fixed
>> - 5.11 is what the latest linux exts have eve
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build PHP 5.5beta1 with clang, so the question is:
>
> Would you be interested in the results? This would be one shot only.
>
> The next step would be to do automatic builds and publishing results of
> scan-build (a Clan
On 2013-03-26, Ond?ej Sur? wrote:
> --bcaec548a7f385895a04d8d51fce
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build PHP 5.5beta1 with clang, so the question is:
>
> Would you be interested in the results? This would be one sho
On 03/26/2013 11:44 PM, Anatol Belski wrote:
> What +/- I personally see upgrading this at this time:
>
> contra:
> - there might be bugs, the next release might have not all them fixed
> - 5.11 is what the latest linux exts have even as dev
> - older/custom magic files might be incompatible
>
>
On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 17:10 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> agree, but the current implementation shouldn't be shipped until we
> find an acceptable solution.
+1
johannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Sam Hermans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The rcf howto pushed me into mailing you guys to measure reaction.
>
> For a project i am working on i struggle a lot with the fact that
> $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDRESS'] return policy is to prefer IPv6 over IPv4, and
> that gethostbyname p
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Andreas Heigl wrote:
> > Am 27.03.13 13:41, schrieb Jordi Boggiano:
> >> On 27.03.2013 13:18, Lars Strojny wrote:
> >>> Not really, as an interface guarantees behavior, which is not possible
> for DateTimeImmu
On 3/26/13 3:29 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
I am concerned by the introduction of DateTimeImmutable extending
DateTime
...
If interoperability was in mind, it will not be given, because every
single API which has been written in the last seven years and has
DateTime in it's signature is potentia
I agree, PHP should have world-class support for v6. What is your proposal
exactly?
Am 27.03.2013 um 13:39 schrieb Sam Hermans :
> Hi,
>
> The rcf howto pushed me into mailing you guys to measure reaction.
>
> For a project i am working on i struggle a lot with the fact that
> $_SERVER['REMO
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Andreas Heigl wrote:
> Am 27.03.13 13:41, schrieb Jordi Boggiano:
>> On 27.03.2013 13:18, Lars Strojny wrote:
>>> Not really, as an interface guarantees behavior, which is not possible for
>>> DateTimeImmutable and DateTime.
>>
>> The interface could be a subset o
Am 27.03.13 13:41, schrieb Jordi Boggiano:
> On 27.03.2013 13:18, Lars Strojny wrote:
>> Not really, as an interface guarantees behavior, which is not possible for
>> DateTimeImmutable and DateTime.
>
> The interface could be a subset of DateTime public methods, including
> only the readonly ones
Hi,
The rcf howto pushed me into mailing you guys to measure reaction.
For a project i am working on i struggle a lot with the fact that
$_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDRESS'] return policy is to prefer IPv6 over IPv4, and that
gethostbyname prefers IPv4. It seems that the gethostbyname
function as used
On 27.03.2013 13:18, Lars Strojny wrote:
> Not really, as an interface guarantees behavior, which is not possible for
> DateTimeImmutable and DateTime.
The interface could be a subset of DateTime public methods, including
only the readonly ones.
I can't imagine how this could possibly be named i
Not really, as an interface guarantees behavior, which is not possible for
DateTimeImmutable and DateTime.
Am 27.03.2013 um 09:03 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs :
> 2013.03.26. 20:29, "Michael Wallner" ezt írta:
>>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I am concerned by the introduction of DateTimeImmutable extending
>> D
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Lester Caine wrote:
> Levi Morrison wrote:
> > While I personally think DateTime should have been immutable from the
> > beginning, I don't think it's in PHP's best interest to try to fix
> > this particular problem by introducing DateTimeImmutable.
>
> There seems to be some
Levi Morrison wrote:
While I personally think DateTime should have been immutable from the
beginning, I don't think it's in PHP's best interest to try to fix
this particular problem by introducing DateTimeImmutable.
There seems to be some strange assumption that a DateTime value is fixed in som
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> The solution is simple: separate the classes and provide a
> toDateTime() on DateTimeImmutable for interoperability purposes.
Do you have time to make a patch? I unfortunately don't.
cheers,
Derick
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
2013.03.26. 20:29, "Michael Wallner" ezt írta:
>
> Hi all!
>
> I am concerned by the introduction of DateTimeImmutable extending
> DateTime, and despite not being the talking guy, I'll try to outline
> the reasons why I and obviously a lot of other people think so.
>
> I can understand the frustra
21 matches
Mail list logo
