On 03.07.2008, at 02:04, Philip Olson wrote:
Essentially the plan is to DocBookify it once 5.3 nears release but
today that page requires additional content. Random people add
content randomly and unfortunately I'm no longer able to lead this
effort so please take over the task of 5.3
On 03.07.2008, at 02:08, Alan Knowles wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Aloha,
Since Johannes has been stumped (and therefore not as visible as he
would have hoped) with work and 5.3 CVS is already filled brim with
awesome new features, I have been approached by several people
wondering
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 03.07.2008, at 02:08, Alan Knowles wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Since Johannes has been stumped (and therefore not as visible as he would
have hoped) with work and 5.3 CVS is already filled brim with awesome new
features, I have
Hi Lukas,
From my point of view the proposed closures concept is very consistent
and implementation doesn't complicate the engine at all. The code
without closures will work without any changes, but code with closures
(instead of eval() and create_function()) will work significant faster
as
Etienne Kneuss wrote:
2) late static binding
Etienne had some questions recently [5], which were met by criticism by Stas
[6]. However all others agreed with the change. So I guess we are solid here
too?
Yes, the only thing remaining is a tad of love from somebody with ZE
karma to commit
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
2) phar extension
I guess we are pretty solid here?
We'll need to review the phar before release. It definitely must be in
5.3, but it should be improved, and this improvements may require some
changes in ZE.
For now packed phpMyAdmin is 4 times slower than unpacked
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, Rui Hirokawa wrote:
hirokawa Sun Jun 29 08:21:36 2008 UTC
Modified files: (Branch: PHP_5_3)
/ZendEngine2 Zend.m4 zend.c zend_compile.c zend_globals.h
zend_highlight.c zend_language_scanner.c
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 02.07.2008, at 13:41, Christian Seiler wrote:
So as things look atm, closures will have to wait until then. But cool
features like closures, traits etc will undoubtedly increase the incentive to
get working quickly on 5.4 and this can happen
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 02.07.2008, at 13:41, Christian Seiler wrote:
So as things look atm, closures will have to wait until then. But cool
features like closures, traits etc will undoubtedly increase the incentive to
get working quickly on 5.4
Absolutely agree.
I don't see any reason for 5.4. We don't plan any significant new features.
Thanks. Dmitry.
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 02.07.2008, at 13:41, Christian Seiler wrote:
So as things look atm, closures will have to wait until then.
On 03.07.2008, at 10:34, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Absolutely agree.
I don't see any reason for 5.4. We don't plan any significant new
features.
You guys are scaring me ..
I was hoping to evade such discussions. PHP 5.3 is probably the minor
version release with the most major changes ever.
On Jul 3, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Absolutely agree.
I don't see any reason for 5.4. We don't plan any significant new
features.
You guys are scaring me ..
I was hoping to evade such discussions. PHP 5.3 is probably the
minor version release with the most major changes
Hello everbody,
one thing on my mind is the current naming of our internal classes. I
could say the same for our functions but no, I don't have plans to save
the universe, saving the world should be enough for now. So I've tried
to dig through the ext/spl-package as an example how to implement
Hi,
1) The RFC page says that closures pass by value by default. Although it is
not stated, am I correct in saying that due to the way resources and objects
(and presumably therefore lambdas) are handled they will still have the
effect of passing by reference anyway, just as with a function
Lukas Kahwe Smith skrev:
But if we put the burden of being the last planned PHP 5 release onto
5.3, we will have huge issues getting it out the door. So please let us
keep 5.4 on the table, but at the same time do everything we can to get
PHP 6 onto some sort of release schedule.
Let me see
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
pajoyeThu Jul 3 13:50:15 2008 UTC
Modified files: (Branch: PHP_5_3)
/php-src/ext/mcrypt mcrypt.c php_mcrypt.h
/php-src/ext/mcrypt/tests bug35496.phpt bug41252.phpt bug43143.phpt
Hello,
3) re2c
Rui recently came to the list with notes on the ZE MB feature [7].
@Scott/Marcus: Is this enough for you guys to get this working?
@Rui: Is there any chance you can get more people in the japanese (or
asian in general) community involved here?
I hope that we can have more
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Derick Rethans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
pajoyeThu Jul 3 13:50:15 2008 UTC
Modified files: (Branch: PHP_5_3)
/php-src/ext/mcrypt mcrypt.c php_mcrypt.h
I think given closures is in a pretty fully baked state (we had an
exemplary process) the main questions to ask are:
a) Assuming we are going through numerous beta and RC cycles for PHP
5.3, do we think that the time it would take for other features like
namespaces, garbage collector to be fully
+1 from me - unicode is very very needed indeed.
Normaly on every project I have to deal with 3 languages - english, russian
and latvian - and there is no fun in making advanced html/bbcode parser (not
based on str_replace or preg_replace - it is far more complex than that)
using mb_string
I don't see big problems with closures. The patch is simple and stable.
It's main part isolated in zend_closures.c and it doesn't affect other
parts of engine.
I expect more problems with GC
Thanks. Dmitry.
Andi Gutmans wrote:
I think given closures is in a pretty fully baked state (we had an
Given the 5.3 is not yet out (even as a Beta) I think discussing 5.4
is way way premature. For now I think 5.3 is close enough to 6 in
feature set to not warrant 5.4. I think the effort at this point
should be spent on getting 5.3 out and figuring out how to proceed
with PHP 6.
On
Looking through the closures patch, I would tend to agree. GC has
certainly caused us way more headaches in APC-land than closures will,
from the looks of it.
-Rasmus
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
I don't see big problems with closures. The patch is simple and stable.
It's main part isolated in
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:06:48 +0200, Christian Seiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
1) The RFC page says that closures pass by value by default. Although
it is
not stated, am I correct in saying that due to the way resources and
objects
(and presumably therefore lambdas) are handled they
Hey Lars;
On Jul 3, 2008, at 4:07 AM, Lars Strojny wrote:
one thing on my mind is the current naming of our internal classes. I
could say the same for our functions but no, I don't have plans to
save
the universe, saving the world should be enough for now. So I've tried
to dig through the
PHP 6+ Development, Docs, and builds
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Daniel Convissor escribió:
Because that's what the manual says it should do.
Right, however I disagree with the fact it is a warning, it should be a
fatal error IMHO.
--
A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no
mercy.
Cristian Rodríguez R.
Platform/OpenSUSE
27 matches
Mail list logo
