Nice to hear some work is done but I get very annoyed every time I see
the words behind the scenes (or something alike). I guess it was
because it's impossible to discuss anything on internals without the
noise coming from outside..? Could we finally make this list read-only
for every one but the
Surely the noise coming from outside are people's valid opinions? I mean
it's the people making the noise who have to live with decisions made on
the internals list, on a daily basis, and for most there income depends
on it.
It's not just php you're discussing, it's thousands of developers
Hello Nathan,
if their income depends on it, hmm, I wonder, why the hell are they only
complaining? The amount of people being constructive and not actual
developers with a php.net account is close to zero. That is what Jani had in
mind. We have always been open and we have always gladly given
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If the class for which autoloaded request is issued *exists*.
However, we are discussing the case where this class *does
not exist*, so it can not be loaded. Thus, autoload request
will be repeated on
On 12/12/2007, Nathan Rixham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if their income depends on it, hmm, I wonder, why the hell are they
only complaining?
point well made
always been open and we have always gladly given account to
people who contributed.
and it's been well noticed, not to mention
Hate to bring this one up; I'll be brief!
for instance smarty get's upgraded and has it's own namespace, I have a
class which extends it, soon to be in my applications namespace which
implements an interface in my interfaces namespace.. how does one extend
a class in another namespace and
Hi,
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 17:13 -0600, Gregory Beaver wrote:
Hi,
I've been furiously working behind the scenes with Stas and Dmitry, and
have some enhancements to namespaces in the form of 2 patches.
1) multiple namespaces per file
2) use ::name;
1) multiple namespaces per file
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 22:33 -0600, Gregory Beaver wrote:
Any brackets adds another set of shift/reduce to the parser, regardless
of how the syntax of the language is defined.
That's not all with that syntax.
?php
{
class foo { }
}
?
Leads to a delayed declaration which is done at
On 20 November I finally sent a request for a PHP CVS account
(danbrown), but still haven't received any acknowledgment. However, I
realized that I was having problems with my email intermittently, with
some messages not routing through properly. Does anyone here know how
I could check on
On 20.11.2007 21:57, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
Assisting with maintenance of the php.net site, documentation,
and bug fixes, as well as further developing the runtime and
including bundled packages (perhaps such as the TTS bindings
we created during the spring).
Usually we don't give CVS
On Dec 12, 2007 10:33 AM, Antony Dovgal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20.11.2007 21:57, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
Assisting with maintenance of the php.net site, documentation,
and bug fixes, as well as further developing the runtime and
including bundled packages (perhaps such as the TTS
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Nice to hear some work is done but I get very annoyed every time I see
the words behind the scenes (or something alike). I guess it was
because it's impossible to discuss anything on internals without the
noise coming from outside..? Could we finally make this list
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Hate to bring this one up; I'll be brief!
for instance smarty get's upgraded and has it's own namespace, I have a
class which extends it, soon to be in my applications namespace which
implements an interface in my interfaces namespace.. how does one extend
a class in
Nice to hear some work is done but I get very annoyed every time I see
the words behind the scenes (or something alike). I guess it was
It is much more efficient to communicate in person (preferably
physically, but can be phone, IM, chat, etc.) than to write
semi-anonymous mails to public
Just a quick idea - what if requiring that autoloaders behave
deterministically, that is, once a certain autoloader implementation
has been given the possibility to find a class it will never be asked
again (because it wouldn't find it later on either).
I'm not sure if it's a correct assumption
Just a quick idea - what if requiring that autoloaders behave
deterministically, that is, once a certain autoloader
implementation
has been given the possibility to find a class it will
never be asked
again (because it wouldn't find it later on either).
I'm not sure if it's a
Since everyone is in the namespace frame of mind, is there a
possibility of a namespace access modifier?
The way I envision this working is that if for example:
namespace Foo;
class Bar {
nsprotected $_someProperty = null;
}
(or some other equivalent grammer)
Would allow the property
Would this not do the same thing and perhaps be easier to implement:
namespace Foo;
protected $var;
class Bar {
}
thus allowing use of private public protected before variables, and hell
why not classes aswell.
private = only methods, code, classes in namespace Foo have access
protected =
Hello Ralph,
I don't think properties are the appropriate level to specify
namespace based access modifiers. I do think that a coarse-grained
access restriction on a class by class basis might be.
public class Foo {} // Default
private class Foo {}
(protected is meaningless because there
Jeff Moore wrote:
I don't think properties are the appropriate level to specify namespace
based access modifiers. I do think that a coarse-grained access
restriction on a class by class basis might be.
Perhaps you are right, but I was using that as an example. I actually
see great value in
hello!
Jani Taskinen wrote:
Nice to hear some work is done but I get very annoyed every time I see
the words behind the scenes (or something alike). I guess it was
because it's impossible to discuss anything on internals without the
noise coming from outside..? Could we finally make this list
21 matches
Mail list logo
