Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

Morning Yasuo, First, thanks for all the effort ... You already know that, a refusal to merge a patch doesn't mean you wasted your time, it should serve to refocus your research. So, I thought I'd say some stuff, to aid with that ... The first thing I would do is break down the probl

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

Hi Joe, On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > > First, thanks for all the effort ... You already know that, a refusal to > merge a patch doesn't mean you wasted your time, it should serve to refocus > your research. > > So, I thought I'd say some stuff, to aid with that ..

[PHP-DEV] GOOD Benchmark Results for PHP Master 2016-03-24

Results for project PHP master, build date 2016-03-24 06:27:56+02:00 commit: bc9910c previous commit:bc49f8b revision date: 2016-03-23 12:32:54+01:00 environment:Haswell-EP cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores, stepping 2, LLC 45 MB

[PHP-DEV] [VOTE] var deprecation

Hello everyone, It has been two weeks since discussion started on the RFC to deprecate and eventually remove the "var" keyword (and one month since the idea was originally proposed). This RFC has therefore been moved to the "In Voting" state. Voting will begin immediately and will end in one wee

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

On 24 March 2016 at 02:34, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi all, > > Since the vote for > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/precise_session_management > is declined 15 vs 11. > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/precise_session_management#vote > > We have to come up with other solutions for > > - Session loss by race cond

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Chris Riley wrote: > On 24 March 2016 at 02:34, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Since the vote for > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/precise_session_management > > is declined 15 vs 11. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/precise_session_management#vote > > > > We

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

On 24 March 2016 at 14:43, Scott Arciszewski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Chris Riley wrote: > >> On 24 March 2016 at 02:34, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: >> >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Since the vote for >> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/precise_session_management >> > is declined 15 vs 11. >> > htt

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Voting] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Hey Midori, On 24 March 2016 at 16:02, Midori Kocak wrote: > Hi, > > Remember Null coalesce Equal Operator ??= She is in voting phase now. :) > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator < > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator> > The poll doesn't seem to be open f

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Voting] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Midori Kocak wrote: > Hi, > > Remember Null coalesce Equal Operator ??= She is in voting phase now. :) > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator < > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator> I don't get to vote, but I'm very much +1

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Voting] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Sorry I opened it now. You can vote. > On 24 Mar 2016, at 16:06, Marco Pivetta wrote: > > Hey Midori, > > On 24 March 2016 at 16:02, Midori Kocak > wrote: > Hi, > > Remember Null coalesce Equal Operator ??= She is in voting phase now. :) > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc

Re: [PHP-DEV] Huge Pages

On 3/19/16 23:29 , Rasmus wrote: We have a bit of a problem with how Linux handles huge pages when you run out of them. I've been discussing it with Dmitry and he recently committed a way to disable Huge Pages in the main allocator to master: https://github.com/php/php-src/commit/945a661912612c

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Precise session data management

I'm +1 for splitting it into smaller chunks. I didn't fully comprehend the impact of some aspects of the RFC and therefore didn't feel it was appropriate for me to cast a vote either way. However, if the different pieces were broken out into smaller, more-focused RFCs I would likely vote for most

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Couldn't agree more :) //Björn Den 2016-03-24 kl. 16:49, skrev Sara Golemon: Changing "equal" to "assignment" seems to have been the suggestion. I've taken that into the short-ternary version. And as a minor edit (not worth closing/reopening vote) would recommend the same for null coallesce.

[PHP-DEV] [RFC][Voting] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Hi, Remember Null coalesce Equal Operator ??= She is in voting phase now. :) https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator Thank you so much, Midori http://www.mynameismidori.com

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

there were no suggestions. Do you have one? > On 24 Mar 2016, at 16:36, Björn Larsson wrote: > > Den 2016-03-13 kl. 02:59, skrev Andrea Faulds: >> Hi Midori, >> >> Midori Kocak wrote: >>> Forgive my rookieness and let me introduce my first RFC here: >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_e

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Changing "equal" to "assignment" seems to have been the suggestion. I've taken that into the short-ternary version. And as a minor edit (not worth closing/reopening vote) would recommend the same for null coallesce. -Sara On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Midori Kocak wrote: > there were no sugg

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Sara Golemon wrote: > Following on from Midori, I've moved the short-ternary assignment > operator RFC into voting phase. > The implementation for which will be her patch with appropriately > different symbols and tests. > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short_ternary_eq

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

Following on from Midori, I've moved the short-ternary assignment operator RFC into voting phase. The implementation for which will be her patch with appropriately different symbols and tests. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short_ternary_equal_operator -Sara -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: > Following on from Midori, I've moved the short-ternary assignment > operator RFC into voting phase. > The implementation for which will be her patch with appropriately > different symbols and tests. > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short_ternary_eq

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Warn about invalid strings in arithmetic

Le dim. 20 mars 2016 à 03:36, Andrea Faulds a écrit : > Hi everyone, > > I previously opened voting on the "Warn about invalid strings in > arithmetic" RFC, but I had to cancel it because of the issue of > inconsistent handling of scientific notation strings. > > Since then, the RFC has been upda

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > To clarify, as the RFC only mentions this by implication: > > unset($x); // Assume $x is undefined > $x ?:= $y; > > This will throw a notice, correct? > Yes. The equivalent short-ternary: $x = $x ?: $y; would throw a notice, so the

[PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Hi internals! For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: $a <=>= $b; // same as $a = ($a <=> $b); Additionally, we should add an is-identical assignment operator: $a $b; // same as $a = ($a === $b); Thank you for taking this proposal under cons

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Hi! > > For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: > > $a <=>= $b; Or maybe we shouldn't? Not only it is quite ugly, I am struggling to imagine a use case in which one would need such a construct, and I would recommend rewriting any code that uses such construct. > Add

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

> Am 24.3.2016 um 18:50 schrieb Nikita Popov : > > Hi internals! > > For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: > >$a <=>= $b; >// same as >$a = ($a <=> $b); > > Additionally, we should add an is-identical assignment operator: > >$a $b; >// same a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Bob Weinand wrote: >>$a $b; >>// same as >>$a = ($a === $b); >> > I see a problem with that … It’d be impossible to make it consistent with > is-equal comparison… > > === is already is-identical comparison. So, no symbol for the is-equal > assig

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

+1 On Thursday, 24 March 2016, Nikita Popov wrote: > Hi internals! > > For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: > > $a <=>= $b; > // same as > $a = ($a <=> $b); > > Additionally, we should add an is-identical assignment operator: > > $a $b; > // sa

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Morning Nikita, Thanks for all your hard work. Since consistency is one of our main focuses, I move that the discussion period for this extremely important work is moved forward by one week. All in favour, say I. Cheers Joe On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Bob Weinand wrote: > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Morning Nikita, Apologies for my inconsistent use of language ... I meant to say shortened by one week. Cheers Joe On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > Morning Nikita, > > Thanks for all your hard work. > > Since consistency is one of our main focuses, I move that

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

After some discussion (and realizing the referenced implementation needed more work that a simple replacement of tokens), I've decided the close this vote, work with Midori on both implementations some more, and reopen at a later time with a complete implementation (possibly combined with ??=) On

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Hi Nikita, On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > Hi internals! > > For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: > > $a <=>= $b; > // same as > $a = ($a <=> $b); > I'm not sure I see a use case for this, when do you compare 2 values and replace on

[PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] var deprecation

There have been some last-minute concerns raised about var being reserved "for future usage". My intent was that var couldn't be used for function/class names IN CASE it was re-used in the future, but not encouraging it to be re-used. I'd assume that reusing it would require a separate RFC to pas

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Would your proposal also allow ! to work? Colin

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Colin O'Dell wrote: > Would your proposal also allow ! to work? > I think you means !===, which is "not-identical assignment" (!== =) ! is just *CRAZY TALK* -Sara -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 06:50:17PM +, Colin O'Dell wrote: > Would your proposal also allow ! to work? That would be: !=== (one less '=') There should also be: === and !== which are the compare-with-type-juggling and assign operators. So you have assignment operators: !=== === !==

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

You're right! Good call :) On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 3:05 PM Sara Golemon wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Colin O'Dell > wrote: > > Would your proposal also allow ! to work? > > > I think you means !===, which is "not-identical assignment" (!== =) > > ! is just *CRAZY TALK* > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] var deprecation

+1 var should be deprecated On Thursday, 24 March 2016, Colin O'Dell wrote: > There have been some last-minute concerns raised about var being reserved > "for future usage". My intent was that var couldn't be used for > function/class names IN CASE it was re-used in the future, but not > encour

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Colin O'Dell > wrote: > > Would your proposal also allow ! to work? > > > I think you means !===, which is "not-identical assignment" (!== =) > > ! is just *CRAZY TALK* > We shouldn't dismiss such t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

he is trolling :) On Thursday, 24 March 2016, Nikita Popov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Sara Golemon > wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Colin O'Dell > > > wrote: > > > Would your proposal also allow ! to work? > > > > > I think you means !===, which is "not-ident

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On 24 Mar 2016 19:43, "Mutlu Kocak" wrote: > > he is trolling :) > I wouldn't dismiss this idea straight off. I can see a lot of practical uses for chaining assignment operators, like: $a !==<=> $b; Expanded from: $a = $a !== (($a <=> $b) === $b); Which is something I often do in my produ

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

actually it could be proposed to C in 1970 in a same manner for += operator by saying +== and +=== and also +. But hence Dennis Ritchie is dead and he accepted += as a founding father, we have no chance to ask him. Can we ask maybe to Bjarne Stroustrup as being one of another founding father

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Warn about invalid strings in arithmetic

Hi Patrick, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: Hi Andrea, Nice work. I'm globally +0.7 on it, there is however a few things that are unclear to me: * What happens with an empty string? Warning, notice or even nothing? * Would: 42 + ""; produce the same thing than: 42 + null; currently, both are quiet, b

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Hi, Sara Golemon wrote: Changing "equal" to "assignment" seems to have been the suggestion. I've taken that into the short-ternary version. And as a minor edit (not worth closing/reopening vote) would recommend the same for null coallesce. -Sara The other suggestion was to change "coalesce"

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Hi, I changed the name but I really don’ know how to change the url :) Midori > On 24 Mar 2016, at 21:35, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > Hi, > > Sara Golemon wrote: >> Changing "equal" to "assignment" seems to have been the suggestion. >> I've taken that into the short-ternary version. And as a mi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

Hi Midori, Midori Kocak wrote: Hi, I changed the name but I really don’ know how to change the url :) Midori I don't think you can change the URL. In the past I've seen people create a new page in the /rfc/ namespace, copy the content there, and edit the old page to point to the new one.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Warn about invalid strings in arithmetic

Den 2016-03-24 kl. 21:29, skrev Andrea Faulds: Hi Patrick, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: Hi Andrea, Nice work. I'm globally +0.7 on it, there is however a few things that are unclear to me: * What happens with an empty string? Warning, notice or even nothing? * Would: 42 + ""; produce the same t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 09:16:50PM +0100, Midori Kocak wrote: > actually it could be proposed to C in 1970 in a same manner for += operator > by saying +== and +=== and also +. But hence Dennis Ritchie is dead and > he accepted += as a founding father, we have no chance to ask him. Can we ask

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator

thank you so much. I updated the name. On Thursday, 24 March 2016, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi Midori, > > Midori Kocak wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I changed the name but I really don’ know how to change the url :) >> >> Midori >> >> > I don't think you can change the URL. In the past I've seen people c

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add spaceship assignment operator

Hi Nikita, On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > Hi internals! > > For consistency, we should add a spaceship assignment operator: > > $a <=>= $b; > // same as > $a = ($a <=> $b); I miserably fail to imagine any use case for this. > Additionally, we should add an i

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Vote] Short Ternary Assignment Operator

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Sara Golemon wrote: > After some discussion (and realizing the referenced implementation > needed more work that a simple replacement of tokens), I've decided > the close this vote, work with Midori on both implementations some > more, and reopen at a later time w