On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:39 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi,
It would be better to vote
- PHP will have script only (tag less) code or not
then
- How it will be implemented
Regards,
That idea was raised a few times in the past, but Stas and others
expressed, they
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for developers to define in place
if he want's a pure PHP file to be included or a template file with direct
HTML output?
I like that proposal and take it over any other, because it
Arvids,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for developers to define in place
if he want's a pure PHP file to be included or a template
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for developers to define in place
if he want's a pure PHP file to be included or a template file with
16 апреля 2012 г. 11:24 пользователь Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for developers to
hi Tom,
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I don't think a consensus on the following points is likely to emerge
without voting on them individually. I propose carrying out a vote
with up to three questions to be answered depending on your response
to each.
We could vote on whether we like the idea in principle, with the condition that
the final proposal pass separately as a fully detailed rfc. That way you are
telling the authors of these rfcs whether to keep trying and in what direction,
but you are not forced to accept the end product. I would
16 апреля 2012 г. 11:05 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
Arvids,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.com
wrote:
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for
For some this is sufficient, for others (like myself) getting rid of
the initial ?php for pure files is a primary motivation.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.com wrote:
16 апреля 2012 г. 11:05 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
Arvids,
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's sad really, to be honest.
I wonder if people even use this:
echo include 'foo.bar', 'baz';
Probably not, Try it! you get:
1baz
It actually works more like
echo (include foo.bar), 'baz';
than
echo include( foo.bar), 'baz';
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's sad really, to be honest.
I wonder if people even use this:
echo include 'foo.bar', 'baz';
Probably not, Try it! you get:
1baz
It actually works more
On 4/16/2012 1:02 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmervch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
More important include doesn't currently allow multiple parms:
include foo.bar, 'baz';
Parse error: syntax error, unexpected ',' in bla.php on line xx
Regarding
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com wrote:
On 4/16/2012 1:02 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick
WIdmervch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
More important include doesn't currently allow multiple parms:
include foo.bar, 'baz';
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 1:02 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick
WIdmervch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
More
I think the 'as' solution is smart.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Nikita Popov
nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 1:02 PM,
This has been added in version 1.1.1 of the
source_files_without_opening_tag RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/source_files_without_opening_tag
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I think the 'as' solution is smart.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Kris Craig
Hey guys, can we move the RFC updates back to the threads for each RFC?
Subsequent discussion should go there as well.
--Kris
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
This has been added in version 1.1.1 of the
source_files_without_opening_tag RFC:
Please excuse me for butting in without immediate context. I'd just like to
support the idea of a vote on this concept without getting into specifics.
If the vote is positive then we can argue the various merits of the
competing RFCs knowing that we at least agree in general. On the other hand
if
Such a vote would make sense if it were clearly expressed that the
final RFC would also be subject to a binding vote, so there is no risk
of being forced to accept an implementation whose particular details
are unacceptable to you.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Arpad Ray array...@gmail.com
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
Such a vote would make sense if it were clearly expressed that the
final RFC would also be subject to a binding vote, so there is no risk
of being forced to accept an implementation whose particular details
are unacceptable
16 апреля 2012 г. 22:02 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's sad really, to be honest.
I wonder if people even use this:
echo include
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
16 апреля 2012 г. 22:02 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's
What happens if two of them pass?
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.com wrote:
16 апреля 2012 г. 22:02 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hi!
Without willing to end discussions prematurely, it looks to me that
everything possible have been said about the various opening tags
proposals.
Actually, we finally appear to be making some headway. I appreciate
hi,
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps a new list for RFC-specific discussions? =)
We don't need yet a new list. Sit down together and get over your
differences and create the RFC or more if you can't get over your
differences.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
I don't think a consensus on the following points is likely to emerge
without voting on them individually. I propose carrying out a vote
with up to three questions to be answered depending on your response
to each. We could then proceed to discuss the (relatively boring but
essential) details of
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I don't think a consensus on the following points is likely to emerge
without voting on them individually. I propose carrying out a vote
with up to three questions to be answered depending on your response
to each. We could
err it might be 1 week, not 2. Either way, it's definitely too soon for
mine to be voted on.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I don't think a consensus on the following
Bah sorry everyone, I just woke up and I'm still a little groggy lol. It
is in fact 2 weeks.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
err it might be 1 week, not 2. Either way, it's definitely too soon for
mine to be voted on.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr
Hi,
It would be better to vote
- PHP will have script only (tag less) code or not
then
- How it will be implemented
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi,
It would be better to vote
- PHP will have script only (tag less) code or not
then
- How it will be implemented
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net
Awhile back, I raised the possibility of
31 matches
Mail list logo
