The big question is: how would You (Philip,Yasuo) want list
to behave when it encounters a hash? Do you want to get the
keys ? Or the values? Or do you want to get the hashed
element on its own again as key = value ?
No, I don't think it's a good idea. That is why we have
Hey,
I just got back from my vacation so I'll try and reply to any unanswered
Email as soon as possible.
And of course catch up on my php-dev reading.
Andi
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Joseph Tate
wrote:
I propose the following function name changes for clarity and
consistency:
Rename:
domxml_node_insert_before - domxml_node_insert_node
domxml_node_append_child - domxml_node_append_node
I agree here with Ricky. Please stick to the W3C DOM
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.2.0-dev (both current CVS)
I meant PHP 4.3.0-dev.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/
--
PHP
--- Yasuo Ohgaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brad Lafountain wrote:
I keep on hearing that we are totally against MI but we want the
aggergate
function.
Can someone PLEASE explain the reasoning behind such a decision?
I can't think of one example when aggergate would be better
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.2.0-dev (both current CVS)
I meant PHP 4.3.0-dev.
Seems like only my reply to the initial post got through:
ap_save_brigade(ap_filter_t * 0x00800e40, apr_bucket_brigade * *
0x00800a8c, apr_bucket_brigade
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.2.0-dev (both current CVS)
I meant PHP 4.3.0-dev.
Seems like only my reply to the initial post got through:
ap_save_brigade(ap_filter_t * 0x00800e40, apr_bucket_brigade * *
0x00800a8c, apr_bucket_brigade
Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.2.0-dev (both current CVS)
ap_save_brigade(ap_filter_t * 0x00800e40, apr_bucket_brigade * *
0x00800a8c, apr_bucket_brigade * * 0x10e6fe6c, apr_pool_t * 0x007ff898)
line 562 + 49 bytes
php_output_filter(ap_filter_t * 0x00800e40, apr_bucket_brigade *
0x00800f60)
If you're at it can you guys please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy().
Thanks,
Andi
At 15:39 30/03/2002 +0100, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Try this patch. It does the same but it's a better solution.
But where is the configure variable to have your feature
disabled by default? - keep to discussion
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
mbstring is stable including mbregex feature. Since it was
avialable as 3rd party module for a long time.
that was what i thought about ext/ctype
remember what it did to MacOS/X when i finaly enabled it by default?
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The big question is: how would You (Philip,Yasuo) want list
to behave when it encounters a hash? Do you want to get the
keys ? Or the values? Or do you want to get the hashed
element on its own again as key = value ?
My opinion is:
$foo = array('a' = 'apple', 'b' =
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 09:35:25AM +, Philip Olson wrote :
The big question is: how would You (Philip,Yasuo) want list
to behave when it encounters a hash? Do you want to get the
keys ? Or the values? Or do you want to get the hashed
element on its own again as key =
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
mbstring is stable including mbregex feature. Since it was
avialable as 3rd party module for a long time.
that was what i thought about ext/ctype
remember what it did to MacOS/X when i finaly enabled it by default?
Aside from saying it works on values for numerical arrays
I can't say much else. That is intuitive and consistant
to me, not ambiguous.
It is :) Since we both already have different views. I
suggest leaving it; it's not worth the trouble and using the
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 09:45:08AM +, Philip Olson wrote :
Aside from saying it works on values for numerical arrays
I can't say much else. That is intuitive and consistant
to me, not ambiguous.
It is :) Since we both already have different views. I
suggest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
mbstring is stable including mbregex feature. Since it was
avialable as 3rd party module for a long time.
that was what i thought about ext/ctype
remember what it did to MacOS/X when i finaly
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Sounds resonable and I'm expecting this reply ;)
:)
Some people want mbstring almost always (i.e. Under hosting
environment) Anyway, we can try make it standard for 4.3.0.
We have long time to fix problem if we set target to 4.3.0.
Any objections?
Hashes don't have any notion of order so I don't quite understand what
you'd expect to see in $a and what in $b. Well actually I know what you
expect but it doesn't fit in with hashes.
It's not a bug but just the way list() works.
Andi
At 06:29 06/04/2002 +, Philip Olson wrote:
Hello, the
Aaron Bannert wrote:
I think a good way to take advantage of the filter system would be
to break the input stream into buckets of two types: constant strings
and PHP script code. As flex/bison needs to be fed more data (from the
yyinput function I think it's called) it could just read data
Any idea when 4.2.0 is supposed to be released. I remember people asking me
to wait for the Engine 2 preview until 4.2.0 is out and base it on that.
Andi
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Sounds resonable and I'm expecting this reply ;)
:)
Some people want mbstring almost always (i.e. Under hosting
environment) Anyway, we can try make it standard for 4.3.0.
We have long time to fix problem if we set
Okay so I cut out a few user names here but...
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
mbstring is stable including mbregex feature. Since it was
avialable as 3rd party module for a long time.
that was what i thought about ext/ctype
remember what it did to
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Any idea when 4.2.0 is supposed to be released. I remember people asking me
to wait for the Engine 2 preview until 4.2.0 is out and base it on that.
April 22nd, 2002, from
http://news.php.net/article.php?group=php.qaarticle=4470:
Timeline
On 06/04/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have long time to fix problem if we set target to 4.3.0.
Any objections?
Nope, not from me. But I really wonder how many ppl use it (outside
japan/korean)
Well, I'm using it to decode quoted-printable and base64 encodings in
the mailparse
Translating PHP manual into Slovak language.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
fastcgi is, as far as I understand it, now merged into sapi/cgi.
Do we still need the php4/sapi/fastcgi/ directory?
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/
Eric Liedtke wrote:
I'm new in town here, so to speak, so I'm not sure about
proper protocol here, but I found,what I feel is a problem
in the socket extension code. Specifically in the socket_bind
function. I was working with a friends code and it was
trying to bind to port 80, however
Oops forgot the message body on the last one
Ok so after sleeping on it I don't think my solution was
totally in line with the beauty and simplicity of php, I
expect you should be able to pass either a hostname
or a valid ip in the addr arg. Anyway the other part
that confused me is that in
Duh..I feel a bit stupid now. :)
But I think the version with which PHP works is 2.0.36?
(they released 2.0.35) (what is 'GA' release? General Alpha?)
--Jani
On 6 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ID: 15580
Updated by: [EMAIL
Anyone tested 2.0.35 with 4.2.0-dev yet? Should we put
some version check to the configure there?
--Jani
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Jani Taskinen wrote:
Duh..I feel a bit stupid now. :)
But I think the version with which PHP works is 2.0.36?
(they released
GA = General Availability which means it's stable (well, they say it's
stable).
Anyway, it configures compiles fine, but I doesn't work. I haven't
had time to investigate it (I haven't even looked at httpd.conf) so I
don't know if it's a PHP problem... you'll hear from me if it's a PHP
Jani Taskinen wrote:
(they released 2.0.35) (what is 'GA' release? General Alpha?)
'General Availability' a/k/a. 'Final'
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift:
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Duh..I feel a bit stupid now. :)
But I think the version with which PHP works is 2.0.36?
(they released 2.0.35) (what is 'GA' release? General Alpha?)
General Availability
2.0.35 is the latest and the GA version; 2.0.36 is in development
as
A bit more notice would have been nice. Apache 2 from the first notice of
a potential GA release to it hitting the wires was less than 48 hours.
What the heck are we supposed to do with that? I doubt we will have a
released version of PHP that will work with that GA for quite a while.
-Rasmus
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
fastcgi is, as far as I understand it, now merged into sapi/cgi.
Do we still need the php4/sapi/fastcgi/ directory?
Just for a bit longer, there was something else added to the fastcgi
directory that still needs to be integrated.
Shane
--
PHP Development
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Any idea when 4.2.0 is supposed to be released. I remember people asking me
to wait for the Engine 2 preview until 4.2.0 is out and base it on that.
April 22nd, 2002, from
http://news.php.net/article.php?group=php.qaarticle=4470:
Timeline
I posted this a while back and got no feed back.
Can someone look at it?
http://lists.php.net/article.php?group=php.devarticle=81608
#brad
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP
On Sat, 2002-04-06 at 11:21, brad lafountain wrote:
--- Yasuo Ohgaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brad Lafountain wrote:
I keep on hearing that we are totally against MI but we want the
aggergate
function.
Can someone PLEASE explain the reasoning behind such a decision?
I
On Sat, 2002-04-06 at 11:45, Philip Olson wrote:
Aside from saying it works on values for numerical arrays
I can't say much else. That is intuitive and consistant
to me, not ambiguous.
It is :) Since we both already have different views. I
suggest leaving it; it's not
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2002-04-06 at 11:21, brad lafountain wrote:
--- Yasuo Ohgaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brad Lafountain wrote:
I keep on hearing that we are totally against MI but we want the
aggergate
function.
Can someone PLEASE
i know that 4.2.0 is due in a few weeks, but would it be worth kicking
out a 4.1.3 that has support for the recent apache 2 release?
(or just pushing up the 4.2.0 release? is there anything holding back
the release besides some arbitrary timeline?)
jim
--
PHP Development Mailing List
Hi Folks,
I've requested a cvs account some weeks ago to work on the German PHP Manual and maybe
on
more in the future. But i'm a bit frustrated because I didn't get any response
(I wrote at least 2 or 3 emails) - no ACK no NACK :-(
Maybe someone could look into my request and tell me the
From: Roland Moriz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've requested a cvs account some weeks ago to work on the German
PHP Manual and maybe on
more in the future. But i'm a bit frustrated because I didn't get
any response
(I wrote at least 2 or 3 emails) - no ACK no NACK :-(
Please use the form at
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Jim Winstead wrote:
i know that 4.2.0 is due in a few weeks, but would it be worth kicking
out a 4.1.3 that has support for the recent apache 2 release?
I dont think that's worth, because 1: there has been no QA on it, 2: the
branch is quite old and 3: the branch doesn't
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Sterling Hughes wrote:
22-04-2002 Release of PHP 4.2.0
Until then we won't be compatible with Apache 2?
That's right, PHP 4.2.0 would have proper DSO support for Apache
2(.0.35).
Derick
---
Brad Lafountain wrote:
I posted this a while back and got no feed back.
Can someone look at it?
http://lists.php.net/article.php?group=php.devarticle=81608
#brad
I remember your patchpost, It seems it's nice to have.
But I don't have time for testing your patches...
Did you CCed
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 06:33:43PM +0200, Sander Roobol wrote:
Anyway, it configures compiles fine, but I doesn't work. I haven't
had time to investigate it (I haven't even looked at httpd.conf) so I
don't know if it's a PHP problem... you'll hear from me if it's a PHP
problem...
CVS
Hello all,
i'm trying to port php on a Nonstop Kernel system (Tandem/Compaq OSS/Posix
compliant), and have a few questions to start with. I'm just trying to get
it to compile (which is not a simple task!), and notice an enormous amount
of bad casting in the code. For example:
int joe =
Fab Wash wrote:
Hello all,
i'm trying to port php on a Nonstop Kernel system (Tandem/Compaq
OSS/Posix compliant), and have a few questions to start with. I'm just
trying to get it to compile (which is not a simple task!), and notice an
enormous amount of bad casting in the code. For
At 02:23 07/04/2002 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Jim Winstead wrote:
i know that 4.2.0 is due in a few weeks, but would it be worth kicking
out a 4.1.3 that has support for the recent apache 2 release?
I dont think that's worth, because 1: there has been no QA on it,
Uhhh nevermind. I just grabbed 4.2.0RC2 and found that
a slew of fixes have already been commited.
-e
Eric Liedtke wrote:
Oops forgot the message body on the last one
Ok so after sleeping on it I don't think my solution was
totally in line with the beauty and simplicity of php, I
expect
Morning,
i did not really follow the discussion, but: what about just releasing an
apache2 patch for 4.1.2 (for the people that cannot wait). I don't think
that Apache 2 is worth to hurry a new release. I think the people that
install it now are only the freaks that always want the newest
52 matches
Mail list logo
