Nathan Rixham wrote:
what if Bar implements Foo, or Bar extends Foo - surely that should be
compatible given the inheritance chain.
I ran into this exact issue and thought it was strange. Is there a
reason this shouldn't be allowed?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
Victor Bolshov wrote:
Having two similar syntaxes that work differently - would make the
situation even worse that it is now - I beleive. And I totally agree
with Rasmus - strict typed language mustnt be called PHP. (Just a poor
user's notice to all of you internals' geeks out there)
2010/8/11
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
...
anyway .. for the love of god, could be please stop arguing in circles, nothing
.. really nothing that people brought forth pro/con any approach in regards to
type checking/hinting whatever hasn't been mentioned on this list multiple
times.
...
I agree with
Johannes Schlüter wrote:
Good that this discussion happens in a secret place on a list no
community members can see.
Oh wait. It doesn't. Oh and wait we let users participate!
And we know best - well part of this is that for doing the discussion
in a sane way you need some minimum knowledge
Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
I think by now, whatever you think on strict typing/typehints, it is
clear to everybody that there's no consensus about this feature, and
with Rasmus, Zeev Andi, along with many others, being against it, as
of now it can not be a part of an official PHP release.
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
There is way too much code that uses ext/mysql and ext/mysql does not depend
on a legacy library, I don't think we can remove it. As far as mssql, it is
the one way to talk to Microsoft SQL from *nix systems, until there are good
alternatives for a direct interface, I
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
I don't see any mentions about non windows enviroment.
Tyrael
I thought the ODBTP one was for Unix too. Not sure on other OS's though.
Nor other details, we use MySQL instead, just noticed this documentation.
Davey Shafik wrote:
Do you propose to have a warning when the types are a mis-match, similar to the
array-scalar conversion example from Gustavo? (strtoupper(array('ABC')))
If you have a warning or notice, that warns of potential loss of data accuracy,
then
I think I'd be OK with
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
1. SYSTEM NAMESPACES.
Come on. Is it really that hard to write strlen? Or array_merge? Would
it be better if they were len (of what?) and merge (what?)? I don't
think so.
No, it is not hard to write strlen but I would also like to see these
functions organized
Sean Coates wrote:
I don't believe there's anything stopping you (or other users) from creating either
userspace or extension wrappers to handle organization and consistency. You could even
use the system namespaces, since they don't exist.
True, the thought has crossed my mind. But I'm more
Alban wrote:
I don't understand why you focus on Strict / Weak question.
For me it's very simple, it's not obligatory use Type Hiting. Developpers
wants to write a weak code, they'll just have to not use Type Hiting and
developpers wants wrote a stric code they'll have to use it.
After,
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Last week or so there was a fairly detailed discussion on the internals
list regarding type hinting based on my original patch. Since then the
patch has been revised to address the major concerns that were
identified (breakage of binary compatibility) as well extended
Ford, Mike wrote:
function func(int $i)
for strict type checking, and
function func((int)$i)
for coercion aka casting (although now I've seen it written down I'm not
so sure! ;).
Just want to throw my 2 cents in.
Big +1 for this syntax
I think with the addition of this and
First, I want to say thanks for determining the best separator. Even
though it's not what everyone would like, it's what would work best.
Second, sorry for starting a new thread. To me, continuing the
resolution discussion in the namespace separator and whining isn't the
correct place.
Just to make my post clear, I'm in favor of this approach for
non-qualified calls in a namespace.
1. global
2. autoload
3. fail
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Ryan Panning wrote:
I've been wondering, is such a thing even possible? Is there a good way
to implement an object destruct order? Here are my thoughts:
In the class definition, specify what level of destruction the objects
should be on. How, I have no idea, I haven't thought of a good syntax
I've been wondering, is such a thing even possible? Is there a good way
to implement an object destruct order? Here are my thoughts:
In the class definition, specify what level of destruction the objects
should be on. How, I have no idea, I haven't thought of a good syntax.
It should be an
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Another issue I just came across caused by :: being used for both
namespaces and classes is the fact when it comes to validation such as
the one I've just put it for constant names, its impossible to determine
if the prefix is a namespace or a class name. So, I
Greg Beaver wrote:
Hi,
http://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaceissues
Read it and discuss. Let's be clear people: the technical problems in
namespaces are limited and solvable. The problems in the political
environment surrounding them may not be. Wouldn't politics be a
stupid-ass reason to remove
Paweł Stradomski wrote:
W liście Ryan Panning z dnia piątek 17 października 2008:
Request Autoload Gets Type
---
A::B:C A::B:C Class
A::B:func() A::BNamespace
A::B:C::CONST A::B:C
Elizabeth M Smith wrote:
snip
This can be solved in three ways.
1. Greg's leaf solution
foo::bar-baz(); - namespace foo::bar, function baz
foo-bar::baz(); - namespace foo, static method bar::baz
Personally I don't like this, get confusing even if we pick some weird
operator like :
2.
Jochem Maas wrote:
1) rip them out
+1 ... I concur with Steph's opinion
Also +1 for taking them out.
Namespaces should be saved for PHP 6 IMO as well. Now that the current
namespaces have been tested there is at least a starting point for
discussion. And that discussion has started as
Steph Fox wrote:
I don't want to see that whole ns separator debate all over again any
more than you do, but I really don't see a good way to avoid it... sorry.
+1, I second this completely
From someone who *was* using namespaces developing against the 5.3
branch, this is going to happen
Steph Fox wrote:
Lets just let it die. It is un-needed, un-wanted by many, and the end
result seems to be less that optimal, or even a true implementation
of namespaces.
Oddly enough, I agree with Kevin with my heart and soul. But then I hear
the howls of outrage from the Other Side, who
David Coallier wrote:
2008/9/12 Greg Beaver [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
This is a simple patch that allows files like this:
main.php:
html
head
titletemplate example/title
/head
/html
body
?php
namespace my::template;
// stuff
?
/body
Is it me or this doesn't look really clean? I have a clear
Stan Vassilev | FM wrote:
Hi,
Multiple namespaces per file were introduced to allow certain workflows in PEAR
and frameworks like Symphony which can combine multiple classes and namespaces
in a single package.
They work like this:
namespace X;
...
namespace Y;
...
The problem is, no
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Tried this code (adding echo before 'Global Called!' so that it would
actually output something) - works just fine.
I noticed that error yesterday when I was testing on another computer.
It did work on this computer. I'll have to go back today to the first
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Tried this code (adding echo before 'Global Called!' so that it would
actually output something) - works just fine.
I noticed that error yesterday when I was testing on another computer.
It did work on this computer. I'll have to go back today to the first
Pierre Joye wrote:
hi Ryan,
The ICU dlls were missing from the packages. The latest snapshots have
them. My apologizes for not having catched this error, I had ICU
installed system wide here (not the case anymore :).
Thanks for testing and for your feedbacks!
Cheers,
Hi, I downloaded a new
I am unable to load the Intl extension on Windows XP SP2 using Apache
2.2.8 and the php apache module. I have tried everything I can think of
and for the life of me cannot get it to load. The Apache error log keeps
spitting out this error.
PHP Warning: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic
Hi all, I just wanted some input from this list.
I'm working on a project using the latest snaps of 5.3. There are some
features that I need for this project, such as LSB. I've been running
into some WTF's and issues with new features.
Would it be better to report all of these through the
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Timm Friebe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi again,
Attached you'll find an incomplete patch against PHP_5_3 to add this
functionality. If you like it let me know and I can finish it.
Darn, seems the list didn't like my text/plain
Was static member overloading added in PHP 5.3? I noticed that static
method overloading was (__callStatic). The two would complement each
other and it just seems natural to add these as well. I did notice that
they are apart of the static-class RFC and a bug report, but it would
be nice to
Janusz Lewandowski wrote:
?php
class A
{
function mA()
{
$this-nA();
}
static function mB()
{
self::nB();
}
}
class B extends A
{
function mA()
{
parent::mA();
}
Milan Babuskov wrote:
Rob Richards wrote:
Moving this to the windows list.
I'm having problems to post on it via newsgroup interface, and I don't
know how to subscribe to the mailing list, since it is not listed here:
http://www.php.net/mailing-lists.php
Is there a way to contact someone
David Coallier wrote:
The only thing that Alexey asked was if there was some regenerated
docs. Please, if you feel like you still have problems with SPL in the
core or any other problems with documentation of extensions because of
it's documentation, just start another thread. This one should be
I have been wondering the answer to this question for a while now. A LOT
of stuff has been backported from PHP 6 to PHP 5.3. So much in fact, why
don't you just call PHP 5.3 version 6?
What major new features are left for PHP 6? The big one I can think of
is unicode support and dropping some
Sorry, guess I need to write a new message instead of replying with a
different subject.
David Coallier wrote:
The only thing that Alexey asked was if there was some regenerated
docs. Please, if you feel like you still have problems with SPL in the
core or any other problems with
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Native unicode is not big enough for you?
regards,
Lukas
If you're looking for good PR and reviews, no. I think if you have very
limited new features, the people writing reviews are going to say PHP 6
doesn't have much new and not worth the upgrade. IMO
Honestly,
Lars Strojny wrote:
Hi,
Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 16:29 +0100 schrieb Marcus Boerger:
[...]
looks pretty good to me. Let's see what other responses we get by late
wedensday.
I like the current syntax and don't think it is confusing. So -1 for
changing it.
cu, Lars
I'm also -1 on this
Hi, not trying to be a pest but it was very hard to keep up with all of
those posts about namespaces and the other about type hinting. Was
there, or is anyone able to give a quick summery of those topics? Sorry
if I missed it. Thanks
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
Ryan Panning wrote:
Hi, not trying to be a pest but it was very hard to keep up with all of
those posts about namespaces and the other about type hinting. Was
there, or is anyone able to give a quick summery of those topics? Sorry
if I missed it. Thanks
I'd like to retract my question about
Hi, what are the chances this patch can be committed to the 5.2.x
branch? I'm working on a project which can benefit from this patch but
5.3 sounds to be a ways out.
Thanks,
Ryan Panning
Etienne Kneuss wrote:
Hello,
Thanks! I've that dynamic access of static members patch that is waiting
43 matches
Mail list logo
