Adobe GoLive 6.0 has PHP generation built into it. I've never actually
used it, but it's supposed to be a pretty good start. If you're looking
for a more code-level IDE, then you can go with Daniel's recommendations...
Zeev
At 10:34 AM 3/20/2002, W McCloud wrote:
We are trying to find a php
Yasuo,
Please don't reopen this discussion. Please, pretty please.
Zeev
At 01:35 PM 3/23/2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 11:48 23/03/2002 +0100, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Why not make two tarballs when PHP 4.2.0 gets released? One with the
Zend Engine 1, and the other
, that's really not a valid reason for removing them. The fact these
macros happened to make a bug somewhere else exploitable doesn't make them
any less necessary.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
this gracefully without crashing)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
It should work, it's using exactly the same thread safe code as the one
under Windows...
Zeev
At 14:14 29/03/2002, Markus Fischer wrote:
Hi,
how much thread-safe is PHP on linux when compiled with
--enable-experimental-zts ? When I a set up a callback
handler for a 3rd
Get MT'd? What do you mean by that? We have no plans to make PHP a
multithreaded application at any time in the future, but I'm not exactly
sure why it matters to you..?
Zeev
At 17:16 30/03/2002, Markus Fischer wrote:
Yes, thanks for the answer.
I think the problem is just that I
Markus - is that what you're talking about..?
Zeev
At 20:37 30/03/2002, Shane Caraveo wrote:
My understanding from Markus' original email was that the library he is
using calls back into php on a different thread than that which he called
it with.
Shane
--
PHP Development Mailing List
to :)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
call the custom error handler, we should conduct a full check (i.e., is the
error level within the EG(error_reporting) mask), rather than have a
special check for EG(error_reporting)==0. I'm not sure how people feel
about that..?
Zeev
At 01:48 31/03/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
Hi,
When using
Yes and yes...
At 01:24 AM 4/3/2002, Ilia A. wrote:
Hello,
Are the W32api functions in the CVS will make it into the upcoming 4.2
release and if so will they be a part of the standard binaries distributed
for windows?
Thanks,
Ilia
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To
it crashes? Did you ever get a backtrace?
Zeev
At 03:53 PM 4/3/2002, chand wrote:
Thanks
Here is the patch to the ext/mysql/php_mysql.c file
It looks a bit messy and there might be some stuff you don't get right
away. Basically heres what it does.
Mysql_connect gets a user, host and password
At 06:16 PM 4/3/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And w32api is in PECL CVS btw.
What exactly does this mean, considering it's also in php4/ext/w32api?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
removing __(set|get)_* and only have
__(set|get). +0 on this one too.
Thanks for your input Kristian.
+1 on that.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
I agree with Yasuo - these functions put a de-facto functionality standard
in a highly debated topic that has not yet reached consensus - the least we
could do is point out to people that it may very well change in the future...
Zeev
At 04:40 AM 4/5/2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
--disable
Any particular reason not to just change the signature of
php_deflate_string()? Do you think anything else uses this function? I
doubt it, especially considering its not marked as an API function...
Otherwise, it sounds good...
Zeev
At 11:58 AM 4/5/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
Hi,
I need
in a
language is kind of clumsy and messy. That's not much of a big deal I
guess, but people should realize that.
Zeev
At 12:07 PM 4/5/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 11:05, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
--disable-experimental-aggregate and
--disable
This should really be implemented 100% in compile time, if you touch
zend_execute.c, BUZZ :)
Anyway, incidentally, Jani implemented this very patch a few days
ago. We'll probably import it within a couple of days after we verify that
it doesn't cause any gotcha's...
Zeev
At 12:34 PM 4/5
Ones that have PHPAPI in front of them :)
Zeev
At 02:25 PM 4/5/2002, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Any particular reason not to just change the signature of
php_deflate_string()? Do you think anything else uses this function? I
doubt it, especially
There wasn't any decision made, but someone went forward and implemented
aggregation :)
At 01:59 AM 4/6/2002, 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
Having both makes very little sense. Compile-time vs. run-time in PHP
doesn't make any real difference as far as functionality goes, because the
stages are linked together immediately.
I don't think MI will make it into PHP, now that aggregation was introduced...
At 18:59 08/04/2002, brad
as experimental.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
won't find it trivial to decide which they should use.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
inner_class();
}
function inner_method()
{
return $this-inner_object-inner_method();
}
}
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
going to
work with, it doesn't make too much sense... or does it?
In your example, I understand what it does, but I don't understand what's
the advantage over MI in this case.
At 11:53 09/04/2002, Kristian Koehntopp wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:11:11AM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Having both
For the record, the advantages and disadvantages of variable name
constructors were clear from day one, this issue has been hashed way before
PHP even had OO. Your opinion was that it'd be better to have a common
name, and eventually the discussion about the revised OO model suggested
that
issues don't apply?
Zeev
At 12:09 09/04/2002, Wez Furlong wrote:
COM!
COM uses all of this kind of stuff (implemented in various ways through
inheritance, aggregation via template classes, proxies and delegates).
And why go to all this trouble? So that your code can work with code
written
At 12:38 09/04/2002, Kristian Koehntopp wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:23:57PM +0300, Zeev Suraski wrote:
For the record, the advantages and disadvantages of variable name
constructors were clear from day one,
Nonetheless they were seriously broken in PHP 3,
How? I really don't remember
, considering the fact all of the
binary compatibility issues don't apply?
The only needs of interfaces I see is only for php encoded and closed source
(we can called them binaries ;) ). And in this case, I do not like it ;).
It doesn't effect them either.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List
At 14:03 09/04/2002, Wez Furlong wrote:
On 09/04/02, Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
COM's a hack, though. It really is.
What they did in ATL basically
does a fair amount of magic to give you the ability to inherit code with
COM's strict binary compatible model...
COM implemented
You described my thoughts *perfectly* - thanks :)
Zeev
At 16:26 09/04/2002, Lauri Liinat wrote:
hi all,
I'm personally in favour of having MI in PHP, with the serious alternative
being interfaces. I have failed to understand what interfaces would mean
in a language such as PHP, though
Sounds like a good idea.
At 01:26 12/04/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
outstanding patches and default to building from the bundled library much
like we do with MySQL. I think GD is a popular enough extension for PHP
that it would be extremely cool to have decent truecolor GD2 support
available
side effect, when you copy the
other object around, but as mentioned, it cannot be solved in v1. In v2,
it should work out of the box, because of the special treatment of $this,
and the reference based system.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http
It'll be the same object.
At 17:33 14/04/2002, medvitz wrote:
This may have been addressed already but:
If I have the following code:
class Beer
{
...
}
$a = new Beer();
define('BaseBeer', $a);
$b = BaseBeer;
Will $a $b be the same object or will $b be a copy. (Under ZE2).
Thx.
much sense in my opinion to use constants to
hold objects, but if you see use for it, that's the way it's going to work...
Zeev
At 03:52 15/04/2002, medvitz wrote:
Should it be the same object, though???
I thought that the whole concept of a 'constant' was that it, well, was
constant. Wouldn't
7.1
php version: 4.2.0
new comment:
true true. derick (or someone else) mind briefly explaining why this
is/has to be different?
zeev, can you elaborate why this was implemented like this?
Because it's the cleanest and most elegant way of implementing it.
Zeev
--
PHP
At 21:18 19/04/2002, Lux wrote:
One other quick question: Can you make references to the superglobals,
then call these as variable variables?
Yes.
Can you explain when you need to use these global structures indirectly?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net
}
function foo()
{
$GLOBALS;
$foo = GLOBALS;
print $$foo[bar]; // will work
}
That's a side effect of implementation, though, so I think it's best to say
that indirect reference to $GLOBALS is not supported.
Zeev
At 19:48 20/04/2002, Markus Fischer wrote:
Andi
How much time and memory did compiling zend_execute.c take?
Zeev
At 10:08 21/04/2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Hi all,
It seems we are better have --enable-inline-optimization option
after all.
Andi told some inline directive has removed to make zend_execute.c
work well with -O2. (I don't have
If you're tying two pieces of software together (which is apparently what
he's doing), the reuse of the link can indeed be annoying, and it may make
sense to have multiple links with the same credentials. Not a common case,
but it's possible.
Zeev
At 15:42 22/04/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote
a very long time to be released.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
undefined
variables - which may hide bugs behind them...
Zeev
At 19:12 26/04/2002, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Markus Fischer wrote:
By all means, this is completely insane :-) Have you
seriously thought about what this sentence means? This would
break 99% of the scripts, but I bet you had
in the first place.
He was wrong about the 2nd example, but I'm pretty sure about his first:
?php if ($foo $bar)
...
?
Is this valid XML?
[I'm not taking sides on whether ?php= should be supported or not]
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http
on all -
please refer to the huge threads about the subject, that date back to 1997
or 1998 :)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
why we cared about XML compliance, when a
language such as PHP cannot be XML compliant no matter what :)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 03:18 27/04/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
It looks like we can. I was assuming the SGML characteristics for XML and
it looks like I was wrong. A '' is ok inside the ?php ? tags.
Ok, so that's actually useful. But it sounds odd - XML is not SGML compliant?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing
Yes, but I thought it was SGML compliant (as in, some sort of a subset of
SGML with lots of predefined rules, but still, falls into the SGML language
category).
But then, I could very well be wrong about this.
Zeev
At 05:37 27/04/2002, Andrew Lindeman wrote:
I'm pretty sure XML is a scaled
At 18:44 27/04/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
On Sat, 2002-04-27 at 03:30, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 03:18 27/04/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
It looks like we can. I was assuming the SGML characteristics for XML and
it looks like I was wrong. A '' is ok inside the ?php ? tags.
Ok, so that's
you to easily configure different INI settings
for different versions.
That's kind of what I wanted to do years ago, but ended up making it look
for php.ini in the CWD, which is not all that helpful.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http
been pointed out that the CWD lookup can be a potential
security risk, because it allows people to override php.ini in some shared
hosting environment setups, so it's another reason to replace it with the
path lookup)
Zeev
At 23:17 01/05/2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 23:11 01/05/2002, Shane
At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different
customers...
Do you know this for a fact, or is this an estimate?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 14:00 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 13:36 02/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some hosters use this feature to have different settigns for different
customers...
Do you know this for a fact, or is this an estimate?
This is a fact
We're not necessarily talking about Win32...
Zeev
At 14:02 02/05/2002, Dan Hardiker wrote:
At the risk of getting toasted out of the water... do any serious hosters
use a Win32 enviroment to host on? (who would utilise this way of setting
different settings for different clients)
Are there any
, not php.ini option)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Because it's not efficient enough...
ZE2 is going to have these features built-in in a way that would have no
performance impact.
Zeev
At 14:38 02/05/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I know... but it doesn't belong in ext/ because it's a
Zend_extension. PECL
for different servers that run under
seperate dllhosts.
IMHO the registry is quite enough for that kind of configuration.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
just as crystal
clear as mere simple functions? What kind of a C programmer are you?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
IMHO, the enemy of the good is the better.
We can implement the binary-dir solution in no time, and it covers 95% of
the problems easily, but instead we'll be discussing perfect solutions and
end up doing nothing :)
My 2 agorot.
Zeev
At 08:03 03/05/2002, Markus Fischer wrote:
Hi
To make it clear, this *WAS* a joke :)
At 04:36 03/05/2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 03:58 03/05/2002, Preston L. Bannister wrote:
Heh - there's a question :).
Looking at the two implementations, which do you think you better
understand (with complete certainty), and which would you be willing
selectively loading other files...
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 08:17 03/05/2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
Does this organization of the 4.3 release sound reasonable?
Yep.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
zend_list_delete(). Then, only when no
resources need the resource returned by ldap_read(), it'll be allowed to be
freed.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 17:24 03/05/2002, Jim Winstead wrote:
Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could add it. I just hope people wouldn't start demanding control
structures in there to start selectively loading other files...
let's just hope that by then, someone realizes we already have a
scanner
At 03:04 04/05/2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
One thing that I'm personally don't really understand
note to selfreread entire paragraph after rewriting parts of it/note to
self
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 12:12 07/05/2002, Wez Furlong wrote:
On 04/05/02, Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing that I'm personally don't really understand, is what kind of
support this needs from the infrastructure. As far as I can tell, we
could
define php_database_interface (example
We currently have two html_puts()'s - the old zend_html_puts(), and a
relatively new php_html_puts().
Was there any good reason for adding php_html_puts()? It duplicates the
same logic of both zend_html_putc() and zend_html_puts().
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net
-HOWTO? If not, are there any volunteers
to write one? I think it may be a good idea, because Darwinism goes both
ways - if too many people get bitten by PHP, they'll switch to other solutions.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net
there
when php_html_puts() was introduced, though :)
Zeev
At 15:42 12/05/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
The zend-equivalent is painfully slow.
- Sascha Experience IRCG
http://schumann.cx/http://schumann.cx/ircg
--
PHP
see why it's necessary. If you think buffering phpinfo() is really
necessary, then we can enable buffering for it.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
implemented in the zend implementation (I also
fixed it in the php_html_puts() implementation, before I removed it; At
some point, it was too much of a deja-vu, which is why I don't like
duplicate implementations :)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http
? Because the only code to currently make
use of it is phpinfo(), and it isn't noticeably slow even in the current
byte-by-byte method...
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
I'd *really* like to avoid having two copies of the same code,
though. Please remove the duplicated implementation...
Zeev
At 18:24 12/05/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
What I'm pointing out is that there are no 'inherent flaws' in the 'dog
slow' implementation that we already had
At 18:34 12/05/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
I favor php_html_puts also due to maintability reasons.
Please consider this part of code from zend_html_puts:
!(((ptr+1)=end) || (*(ptr+1)==' ')) /* next is not a space */
!((ptr==s) || (*(ptr-1)==' '))) /* last
the performance of
this function, but if decide that we do, then turning it into a function
pointer is not exactly the right thing to do :)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
I messed up on the test, I left output buffering enabled for tests 2 and
3. So you can see that using output buffering on top of the global output
buffering (whether specialized or not) slows you down by about 30%.
However, to be fair, the numbers w/o global output buffering enabled:
This trace isn't meaningful...
At 20:36 12/05/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Can't tell how to reproduce this, it occurs when working with Harald's
form validation system, which is built on top of PEAR::XML_Transformer:
NTDLL! 778cb892()
NTDLL! 778cb733()
shutdown_memory_manager(int 0,
At 21:33 12/05/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
This trace isn't meaningful...
I know. How would I produce a more useful one?
It's probably not possible - the best thing to do is to try to cut down the
script to the smallest one that still demonstrates the crash.
Zeev
We can check it at the ini handler level.
We can either forbid modifying error_log from userspace (denying
PHP_INI_USER), deny it only in safe mode, or even apply the safe mode
restriction at that level.
At 00:25 13/05/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Not quite sure how to fix this one. It's not
as a performance solution) is probably the only way to
go. And I agree with Stig that PHP 5.0 would be the right point in time to
do that.
Zeev
At 08:54 13/05/2002, Jason Greene wrote:
On Mon, 2002-05-13 at 00:41, Ilia A. wrote:
disable_functions = sleep
Ah but you forgot usleep, and flock
trivial ways of defeating it.
Encouraging people to use CGI is an utopia, there are environnements where
CGI cannot be offered to customers and where PHP is the only option.
I don't think you understood the context. We're talking about the PHP CGI,
not CGI in general.
Zeev
--
PHP Development
We already tried our best to optimize most of the functions that show up in
profiling. Not surprisingly, they are mostly the infrastructure functions...
What profiler are you using? If it's under Linux, chances are it's
*extremely* inaccurate. Profiling under Linux is horrible.
Zeev
At 17
or less the same).
Zeev
At 18:43 13/05/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
I did specify the profiler on line 4 of the message. And it is a pretty
good one actually.
On Mon, 13 May 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
We already tried our best to optimize most of the functions that show up in
profiling
a role.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
zval strings must be NULL terminated, even if they contain binary
data. The str.val.len property represents the length of the string w/o the
terminating NULL.
Zeev
At 16:39 14/05/2002, Robert Cummings wrote:
brad lafountain wrote:
Well i do believe that the zval string SHOULD be null
chroot'd environments always,
running either CGI's or dedicated Apache's. But then, we're on Earth...
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
php_version - Can be:
rem 1) A real PHP version, e.g. 4.0.3pl1, in which case
remphp-4.0.3pl1 will be used as the PHP source tree
rem 2) cvs, in which case the 'php4' directory will be used
rem 3) cvsup, which is like cvs, except the CVS repository
remwill be updated first
rem
rem Author: Zeev
structures, EG(symbol_table)
included, is taken care of by the engine. In that case, the old value will
be destroyed as soon as you replace it in the 2nd SET_SYMBOL call.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
, then you're responsible for it
until you return from your code.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
If you're adding elements to a hash you created using array_init(), and
you're using the standard macros (which apparently you are) - then yes, the
engine will take care of garbage collection for you.
At 09:27 PM 5/17/2002, Robert Cummings wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 09:04 PM 5/17/2002
EX(function_state).function is supposed to be a pointer to the op_array
that you passed to execute().
Any chance the op_array is somehow deleted by mistake? Did you try looking
at EX(function_state) and EX(function_state).function to understand why
it's dying?
At 03:02 PM 5/19/2002, Wez
Wild guess, but did you load an extension using dl() in the file that crashed?
Zeev
At 15:23 21/05/2002, Dave Brotherstone wrote:
Hi,
I've got a particular script that seg-faults when certain parts of it run
(tested with 4.1.0 and 4.2.1, both CGI and Apache module).
I've done a back trace
is everything. If people look for web services, then
IMHO, that's what they should find.
Just wondering though, why not use the wonderful idea of aliases and have both?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
here, for all practical purposes, SOAP has everything to do with the web.
Anyway, it was just an anecdote, if you think it has nothing to do with the
web, it's your right.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
. The packager should have a
list of those, and there should be some sort of an easy way for him to
import the latest *stable* version of the extension. That way,
non-esoteric PECL'd extensions do get to have their own release cycle while
still being included in the PHP distribution.
Zeev
At 17:24 25
for something the most ppl already have
installed.
Having a too old version installed doesn't help much in this case. :-)
If Brad is able to trim down libxml2 to a reasonable size, I'm +1
Same here.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net
that most people have it installed?
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
to
undefined function calls on php-general.
I don't see why it's a problem to bundle libxml2 at all. It doesn't have
to be in our CVS, we can integrate it into the makedist procedure, provided
Brad can automate his trim-down process.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net
Just an overall reply to a point you're making - yes, making the user
download and build something if he wants to use XML is really a con, in my
opinion.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
a very active project.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
a
stable version of libxml rather than support all versions out there)
We need to address the symbol clash issue, and that's about it.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
average users than there are purists.
That said, XML is the ASCII of this age, which makes it more important to
enable than any of the other modules that you mentioned.
Zeev
At 03:08 AM 6/1/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jun 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
[...]
I wish it became
901 - 1000 of 1273 matches
Mail list logo
