Using the non-VC9 nts build (and after erasing sqlite files so they
get created from scratch) I can have PDO sqlite create a table, and
add records, but not delete records (SQLSTATE[HY000]: General error: 1
SQL logic error or missing database). Reverting to 5.2.x works again.
We use a cache layer
Arvids Godjuks wrote:
2008/9/22 Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
3. Functions will not be allowed inside namespaces. We arrived to
conclusion that they are much more trouble than they're worth, and summarily
we would be better off without them. Most of the functionality could be
Hi All,
Can anybody answer the following question for me please.
Why not follow (exactly) Java's strong static package/namespace system
rather than a home grown dynamic namespace system?
It works, it's common, logical, robust, a working model to follow, and
ties in well with the PHP on Java
Jani Taskinen wrote:
So pecl/http is actually ext/curl with OO API?
Not really. libcurl is not HTTP only, pecl/http utilizes libcurl for
it's HTTP request functionality. pecl/http also provides much improved
HTTP response and zlib functionality besides an swizz-army-knife for URLs.
Why not
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
well the question is does it fix some real world bugs? this late in the
game i would not want to include these changes if they just add
features ..
Huh? :) The question to me is, why did you ask me to do it, when
you're not sure what it's about? Not to be anally at
2008/9/26 Nathan Rixham [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi All,
Can anybody answer the following question for me please.
Why not follow (exactly) Java's strong static package/namespace system
rather than a home grown dynamic namespace system?
It works, it's common, logical, robust, a working model to
Richard Quadling wrote:
2008/9/26 Nathan Rixham [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi All,
Can anybody answer the following question for me please.
Why not follow (exactly) Java's strong static package/namespace system
rather than a home grown dynamic namespace system?
It works, it's common, logical,
Hi,
Currently there isn't a way to add http headers into a soap
request. Below is a patch to get headers from the passed in context
(code taken from ext/standard/http_fopen_wrapper.c). Doing something
like this:
$opts = array('http' = array('header' = 'X-foo: bar'));
$ctx =
After some more testing I needed to tweak the patch and the example,
here is version 2.
$opts = array('http' = array('header' = 'X-foo: bar'));
$ctx = stream_context_create($opts);
Brian
--- ext/soap/php_http.c.orig2008-09-26 05:39:50.0 -0700
+++ ext/soap/php_http.c 2008-09-26
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 12:45 -0700, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
1. Allow braces for namespaces. So, the syntax for namespaces will be:
a) namespace foo;
should be first (non-comment) statement in the file, namespace extends
to the end of the file or next namespace declaration.
b) namespace
On 26.09.2008, at 12:04, Michael Wallner wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
well the question is does it fix some real world bugs? this late in
the
game i would not want to include these changes if they just add
features ..
Huh? :) The question to me is, why did you ask me to do it, when
Hi,
We are not yet ready to schedule alpha3, but I am hoping we can do it
in the first half of October. This is just a heads up to tell
everybody that yes there will be an alpha3 and a general timeframe.
This is not an invitation to go crazy and start committing features at
all. If you
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So unless you can take our worries away in terms of BC issues, I guess we
would prefer to leave this patch out of PHP 5.3.
I strongly disagree, for two reasons:
1. We are going to release an alpha3, that's the perfect
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 26.09.2008, at 12:04, Michael Wallner wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
well the question is does it fix some real world bugs? this late in the
game i would not want to include these changes if they just add
features ..
Huh? :) The question to me is, why did you
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Pierre Joye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I strongly disagree, for two reasons:
1. We are going to release an alpha3, that's the perfect time for such change
2. The OB code is messy right now, Mike's work cleaned it up and makes
it more maintainable. 5.3 is going
On 26.09.2008, at 21:59, Pierre Joye wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So unless you can take our worries away in terms of BC issues, I
guess we
would prefer to leave this patch out of PHP 5.3.
I strongly disagree, for two reasons:
1.
On 26.09.2008, at 22:01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 26.09.2008, at 12:04, Michael Wallner wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
well the question is does it fix some real world bugs? this late
in the
game i would not want to include these changes if they just add
features
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 21:38, Lukas Kahwe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and I are a bit worried, that this code did not see that much testing since
it was checked in to HEAD quite a while ago. And seeing that the backport is
That sentence worries me a bit. Are you advocating developing new
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 22:05, Lukas Kahwe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if it does fix bugs .. that changes things of course .. but i asked Mike
specifically about this .. and he did not mention this .. so does it fix
bugs or not?
It does contain at least one bug fix (see HEAD NEWS) and many
On 26.09.2008, at 22:06, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 21:38, Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and I are a bit worried, that this code did not see that much
testing since
it was checked in to HEAD quite a while ago. And seeing that the
backport is
That
Hey Lukas, Johannes, all...
We are not yet ready to schedule alpha3, but I am hoping we can do it in
the first half of October. This is just a heads up to tell everybody that
yes there will be an alpha3 and a general timeframe.
This is not an invitation to go crazy and start committing
Hi!
Does that mean we can drop namespace support until 6.0?
Please?
Rationale:
1) It's uber-contentious, and all the good stuff's only just starting to
turn up that would allow sane design decisions
I don't know what uber-contentios means, but no solution is going to
satisfy 100% of
It does contain at least one bug fix (see HEAD NEWS) and many obscure
bugs that have probably been bogusfied in the past.
I'm mouthy tonight. But I should say two things ('cos that's what I do
best):
1) Mike's version of output buffering has been sitting in HEAD for a very
long time
2) He
Oh Stas, we have to fall out now!
Imperfect solution is much better than perpetual absence of any solution.
See, I'm not sure I agree with that.
I think 'imperfect but basic solution that can be expanded on' would be a
better approach than trying to do it all in one hit.
And I still think
Hi!
And I still think putting it off to PHP 6 would be a smart move. It's
the major thing that's holding up 5.3.
Nothing is holding anything. Lukas has release schedule, and namespace
implementation will fit it.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steph Fox wrote:
Oh Stas, we have to fall out now!
Imperfect solution is much better than perpetual absence of any solution.
See, I'm not sure I agree with that.
I think 'imperfect but basic solution that can be expanded on' would be
a better approach than trying to do it all in one
26 matches
Mail list logo
