[PHP-DEV] "PHP" namespace?

Hi all, Since we have discussion for Next PHP, "PHP" namespace discussion would be nice to have. Currently, PHP module functions/classes/interfaces are using global(root) namespace. If it is changed to use its own namespace, user space APIs may be changed flexible and user controlled manner. Thus

[PHP-DEV] Re： [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

> > > On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig (mailto:kris.cr...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > [a lot] > > Maybe because you see those as competitors, but I see HHVM and friends as > current competitors, being evaluated to replace stock PHP, which is > definitely not covered by any nice statistics you

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

First off, I realize I am top posting but this thread is becoming extremely off-topic, unbalanced and overall ridiculous to see from the sidelines as someone that contributes to open source and also utilizes PHP on a daily basis for more than the last decade. Seriously, cut the shit! Everyone is

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

Hi Kris, On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > According to w3techs, JavaScript retains an extremely tiny market share in > terms of general purpose languages: > > > http://w3techs.com/technologies/comparison/pl-java,pl-php,pl-ruby,pl-python,pl-js > > > It looks like the sources a

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi all, > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Michael Wallner > wrote: > >> >> On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, "Kris Craig" wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner < >> mike.php@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Michael Wallner wrote: > > On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig wrote: > > [a lot] > > Maybe because you see those as competitors, You're the one who said PHP was losing ground to its "competitors", not I. but I see HHVM and friends as current competitors, bein

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] RFC: Catchable "call to a member function of a non-object"

Hi Timm, On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Timm Friebe wrote: > > Only thing that I don't like is it depends on error message to be useful > > rather than error code/status. Was this discussed? Just curious. > > No, this wasn't discussed so far. You're right, this could make the code > inside >

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

Hi all, On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Michael Wallner wrote: > > On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner < > mike.php@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, "Kris Craig" wrote: > >> > > >> > Here's m

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > On Jul 27, 2014 8:17 PM, "Lonny Kapelushnik" wrote: > > > > On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > >> > >> > >> However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not > >> something I like to see in GD. I will rather

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On Jul 27, 2014 8:17 PM, "Lonny Kapelushnik" wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: >> >> >> However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not >> something I like to see in GD. I will rather remove many for php-next >> instead of adding more. Also some new fo

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On 27 Jul 2014, at 19:17, Lonny Kapelushnik wrote: > I’m suggesting having this minor change be one of the BC breaks in php.next. > I’m not making the argument that it is important from a purely technical POV; > I don’t believe it is. I’m making the argument that it is important from an > ope

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not > something I like to see in GD. I will rather remove many for php-next > instead of adding more. Also some new font APIs may as well make the > whole ttf ones less relevant, se

Re: [PHP-DEV] On voting, including the next release name.

> The way voting works now, I happen to know which option is "winning". I > happened to know that *before* I cast my vote. The current results are > posted on the RFC, and the same information percolated into emails > encouraging folks to vote. I wonder, though, if knowing which was "leading" > a

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Language Specification

On 26/07/2014 22:55, Chris Wright wrote: On 25 July 2014 17:25, Larry Garfield wrote: On 7/24/14, 2:38 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: Zend is only one of many contributors. Yes, the engine is still named Zend Engine but the language has been im

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On 27 Jul 2014, at 18:09, Lonny Kapelushnik wrote: > Whom are you suggesting the alias would be simpler for? > > Personally, I do not think it would be simpler for the userland API to have > them aliased. I think an alias will cause unneeded confusion, discussions, > and waste time in an offi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Lonny Kapelushnik wrote: > >>> Wouldn’t it be simpler to just make them aliases? >> >> Indeed, and as I have no problem if Lonny likes to go ahead with this >> RFC, I do not think we need one for such trivial change. > > > Andrea, > > Whom are you suggesting the a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] imagettf* deprecation/removal

>> Wouldn’t it be simpler to just make them aliases? > > Indeed, and as I have no problem if Lonny likes to go ahead with this > RFC, I do not think we need one for such trivial change. Andrea, Whom are you suggesting the alias would be simpler for? Personally, I do not think it would be sim

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

Instead of endless, useless bickering, how about everyone both for and against merging jump in and start helping with phpng (docs, api cleanup/stabilization, but fixes, etc)? Imagine how much more stable and ready to merge it would be if you concentrated the saber rattling energy towards actually

Re: [PHP-DEV] Weird constant expression syntax and bug

Am 27.7.2014 um 10:55 schrieb Stas Malyshev : > Hi! > >> Yes, I agree that this is not correct behavior - and I don't really >> understand why it was introduced and why it isn't trivial to fix. >> PHP-5.5 had a check for this case in place >> (http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_5/Zend/zend_compile.c#70

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig wrote: [a lot] Maybe because you see those as competitors, but I see HHVM and friends as current competitors, being evaluated to replace stock PHP, which is definitely not covered by any nice statistics you can currently view. Cheers, Mike -- PHP Interna

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Michael Wallner wrote: > > On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner < > mike.php@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, "Kris Craig" wrote: > >> > > >> > Here's my questio

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] RFC: Catchable "call to a member function of a non-object"

Hello,   > Yasuo Ohgaki hat am 27. Juli 2014 um 10:11 geschrieben: > >  Hi Timm, > >  On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Timm Friebe > wrote: >    > >    a couple of weeks ago, I proposed a change to the handling of the >situation > >    where methods are called on non-objec

Re: [PHP-DEV] Weird constant expression syntax and bug

Hi! > Yes, I agree that this is not correct behavior - and I don't really > understand why it was introduced and why it isn't trivial to fix. > PHP-5.5 had a check for this case in place > (http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_5/Zend/zend_compile.c#7071) and phpng > contains an AST-compatible variant of

Re: [PHP-DEV] Weird constant expression syntax and bug

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > Could somebody please clarify what issues are still open here? From what > > I understand, both the opcache issue and the recursion issue are fixed > > now. What's the discussion about? > > As I understand, the issue is that if yo

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] RFC: Catchable "call to a member function of a non-object"

Hi Timm, On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Timm Friebe wrote: > a couple of weeks ago, I proposed a change to the handling of the situation > where methods are called on non-objects. Instead of an E_ERROR, the engine > would > raise an E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR, and enable framework and library authors

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner wrote: >> >> >> On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, "Kris Craig" wrote: >> > >> > Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush? >> > >> >> Every day php-ng is not GA, PHP is losing ground to

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On 27/07/14 08:26, Kris Craig wrote: > As you can see, PHP continues to dominate with over 80% market share and no > signs-- at least, none that I can see-- that we are "losing ground" as you > stated. > > So again: What's the rush? Especially since 75% of that are still on PHP5.3 or 5.2 ;) But

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On 27/07/14 07:23, Kris Craig wrote: > Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush? I think that the only 'objection' I have to 'simply' merging phpng is that it is not just a 'single' change? This vote is all or nothing, so every change is bundled without a vote on particular e

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner wrote: > > On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > > Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush? > > > > Every day php-ng is not GA, PHP is losing ground to its competitors. > Umm, how? Do you have any data to support

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Move phpng to master

On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush? > Every day php-ng is not GA, PHP is losing ground to its competitors. People seem to ignore this because of cosmetics.