This extension does not belongs in PECL. It is fully platform
compatible, all other languages offer this functionality, it is actively
maintained (by me), and it will be marked stable by version 4.3
-Jason
n Mon, 2002-09-09 at 18:13, Shane Caraveo wrote:
> Dan Kalowsky wrote:
> > Because the us
Dan Kalowsky wrote:
> Because the user can see how active such functionality is by looking at
> the CVS logs, and doing a search on php-dev conversations.
Sorry, but that's a copout. It expects way to much of the user. If
it's going to remain experimental, OR the api is going to continue to
c
Dan Kalowsky writes:
> Not to continue a "flame war", but this is Open Source, and it is
> done on free time.
"Open Source" is a philosophy.
It shouldn't be an excuse.
Nothing prevents us from treating people with patience and courtesy.
Except of course bad manners and bad attitude.
> Because
and benefit no one.
--Roshan
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan Kalowsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 2:49 PM
> To: NAIK,ROSHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension
>
>
> B
Because the user can see how active such functionality is by looking at
the CVS logs, and doing a search on php-dev conversations.
While the authors have decided to mark it experimental doesn't mean it
will ever not be experimental.
Not to continue a "flame war", but this is Open Source, and it
>
> Between 15 days and 15 months.
Looking at the CVS its been 19 months since the EXPERMENTAL file was last
modified for sockets.
No offense intended but, sometimes people dont seem to like to be asked such
"obvious" questions by users. I realize that people in open source are not
working for
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, NAIK,ROSHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) wrote:
>
> And exactly how long is it expected to continue to stay EXPERIMENTAL ?
Between 15 days and 15 months.
Derick
---
Did I help you? http://www.derickrethans.
And exactly how long is it expected to continue to stay EXPERIMENTAL ?
--Roshan
> -Original Message-
> From: Wez Furlong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:31 PM
> To: Brian Lalor
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV]
Which part of "EXPERIMENTAL" in the docs at
http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.socket-select.php
don't you understand?
If you're so desparate to have things cemented, write a patch,
post it here and we'll commit it.
If you don't have the skills, you might consider offering those that
do some p
On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 01:40, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Hey Jason,
>
> On 20 Feb 2002, Jason Greene wrote:
>
> > Instead of just committing a gigantic patch to solve these problems, and
> > redefine the extensions behavior, I decided to open a thread for
> > discussion on how I intend to solve all
Hey Jason,
On 20 Feb 2002, Jason Greene wrote:
> Instead of just committing a gigantic patch to solve these problems, and
> redefine the extensions behavior, I decided to open a thread for
> discussion on how I intend to solve all the problems.
>
> My solution does involve modifying pieces of th
Stig Venaas wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:48:06AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
>
>>Well, it probably could be done anyway (abstract it another step).
>>However, I don't see it really being that beneficial. The socket
>>functions provide *low level* access to the system socket features.
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:48:06AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> Well, it probably could be done anyway (abstract it another step).
> However, I don't see it really being that beneficial. The socket
> functions provide *low level* access to the system socket features.
> There's no real point
Daniel Beulshausen wrote:
> At 21:23 16.05.2001 +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that the sockets extension would benefit from php_streams as
>> much as php_streams would benefit from the sockets extension, if you see
>> what I mean.
>>
>> I would like to see it using php_streams, as
At 21:23 16.05.2001 +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:
>I'm not sure that the sockets extension would benefit from php_streams as
>much as php_streams would benefit from the sockets extension, if you see
>what I mean.
>
>I would like to see it using php_streams, as that would result in PHP being
>much more
At 10:34 PM 5/16/2001 +0200, Daniel Beulshausen wrote:
>At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>>Daniel,
>>
>>Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this
>>extension?
>>It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you
>>fixing any remaining
I don't appear to have seen/received the rest of this thread,
so please pardon any mistakes in advance...
On 2001-05-16 20:49:30, "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this
> extension?
> It might give php_streams a push and
At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>Daniel,
>
>Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this
>extension?
>It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you
>fixing any remaining issues.
>It would be a nice test bed.
>What do you think?
>
>A
At 04:01 16.05.2001 -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote:
>I've been meaning for a while to do this, so yes, that's perfectly ok.
>
>I don't quite understand "the return values of most functions had to be
>changed because win32 has a completely different error handling". Can you
>elaborate a bit more.
At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>Daniel,
>
>Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this
>extension?
>It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you
>fixing any remaining issues.
>It would be a nice test bed.
>What do you think?
tha
Daniel Beulshausen wrote:
>
>
> hi,
>
> i've updated the sockets extension so that it's usable under win32 as
> well, however it's incompatible to the "old extension" for some reasons
> (thats why i want some feedback):
> sockets fd under win32 are usigned, the previous approach of returning
Daniel,
Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this
extension?
It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you
fixing any remaining issues.
It would be a nice test bed.
What do you think?
About backwards compatibility, without having read the cod
22 matches
Mail list logo
