On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Why don't we have the ?> problem? You can also use ?> in eval()'s. Anyway,
> Rasmus mentioned that a switch already exists although I don't think it's
> such a great idea due to the previously mentioned reasons. I think all PHP
> code should be consiste
At 10:46 28.12.2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 01:45 AM 12/28/2002 +0100, Marcus Börger wrote:
At 22:40 27.12.2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the
cli more you're talking about would support ?> followed by a
Let's keep things similar a
At 01:45 AM 12/28/2002 +0100, Marcus Börger wrote:
At 22:40 27.12.2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the
cli more you're talking about would support ?> followed by a
Let's keep things similar across the board.
Andi
I agree here, too.
At 22:40 27.12.2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the
cli more you're talking about would support ?> followed by a
Let's keep things similar across the board.
Andi
I agree here, too. But when you still want that stuff we can expand CLI
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> We do already have -r, but I haven't changed my mind on this one either.
> Why introduce 2 different kinds of PHP files?
I agree with Rasmus here, IMO it would only lead to confusion.
Derick
> On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>
> > I don't t
We do already have -r, but I haven't changed my mind on this one either.
Why introduce 2 different kinds of PHP files?
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the
> cli more you're talking about would support ?> followed by a
I don't think it's beneficial to PHP to have two modes especially as the
cli more you're talking about would support ?> followed by a
Let's keep things similar across the board.
Andi
At 02:11 PM 12/27/2002 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
We've talked about this in the past, but let's bring it up a
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> We've talked about this in the past, but let's bring it up
> again. It is a bit awkward to use CLI when it requires those
> tags. We should probably have a command-line
> option that tells the parser to start in PHP mode instead of
> HTML/text. Any thoughts on this?
+0.
Or as Zeev might prefer: I like this idea. I also find it a hassle to
have to put start tags at the beginning of cli scripts. It does pose
some problems though with using includes between cli and web scripts,
no?
On Friday, December 27, 2002, at 02:11 PM, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
We've
We've talked about this in the past, but let's bring it up again. It is
a bit awkward to use CLI when it requires those tags. We
should probably have a command-line option that tells the parser to
start in PHP mode instead of HTML/text. Any thoughts on this?
-Andrei
10 matches
Mail list logo
