On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 14:53, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
> We will still need RM to sign the build so ideally we should make it
> reproducible so RM can verify that CI produced expected build and then sign
> it and just upload the signatures (not sure if we actually need signature
> uploaded or if they
On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 14:12, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On 22 February 2024 08:52:49 GMT-05:00, Robert Landers <
> landers.rob...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I have noticed quite a number of emails appearing on externals but not
> >appearing in my inbox. I randomly get an email saying:
> >
> >Hi, this is
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 18:56, Larry Garfield wrote:
> Hello again, fine Internalians.
>
> After much on-again/off-again work, Ilija and I are back with a more
> polished property access hooks/interface properties RFC. It’s 99%
> unchanged from last summer; the PR is now essentially complete and
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 at 23:50, Jorg Sowa wrote:
> Hello Derick,
> there is something wrong. I don't get all of the emails from the new
> setup, only part. Examples of emails I didn't receive:
> - https://externals.io/message/122391
> - https://externals.io/message/122390
> -
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 16:27, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
> Maybe vote on it? (that was suggested in the PR too,
> https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/13194#issuecomment-1900430400 )
>
> Can think of 6 things
>
> 1: Should BLAKE3 be added to PHP? yes/no
> 2: Should ARM Neon (2007) optimized
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 09:51, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
> Hello internals,
>
> Máté Kocsis and myself would like to propose deprecating implicitly
> nullable parameter types.
>
> The RFC is available on the wiki at the following address:
>
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 09:51, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
> Hello internals,
>
> Máté Kocsis and myself would like to propose deprecating implicitly
> nullable parameter types.
>
> The RFC is available on the wiki at the following address:
>
]): blake3_256
> > hash("blake3", "test", options: ["length"=>8/8]): blake3_8
> > hash("blake3", "test", options: ["length"=>1000]): blake3_8000
> >
> >
> > that shouldn't be too difficult to implement
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 02:43, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
> On Monday, 22 January 2024 at 02:29, tag Knife
> wrote:
> > That's why I suggested implementing separate length algorithms like we
> have
> > for SHA3.
>
> Just an etiquette note, please don't top post on the
blake3_512
> > hash("blake3", "test", options: ["length"=>256/8]): blake3_256
> > hash("blake3", "test", options: ["length"=>8/8]): blake3_8
> > hash("blake3", "test", options: ["length"=>1000]):
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 at 18:43, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
> Can we add the BLAKE3 hash?
>
> Created a PR here: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/13194
>
> BLAKE3 is a very fast ("blazing fast") cryptographically secure hash. It is
> the latest iteration of the BLAKE hash, which was a SHA3
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 21:29, Jorg Sowa wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I want to start the discussion on the RFC: Raising zero to the power of
> negative number
>
> Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/raising_zero_to_power_of_negative_number
>
> Kind regards,
> Jorg
>
IEEE 754 dictates that an
> Hi Guys,
>
> A quick question: is it possible to enable AVX2/AVX3 in PHP JIT generated
> code, and hence can get some performance improvement?
> Just check the community first: if anyone has already tried that or got
> some experiences? before we dive into this investigation.
> We are
>
> This is exactly where the problem lies. Is a string with just whitespace
> empty? Why would an ArrayObject with count 0 not be considered to be empty
> while an array with count 0 is? "empty" is subjective and therefore not a
> reliable function to use. Especially in legacy code I find that
>
> However, according to my example, the variable is defined and has its
> value as 0 or false, and empty() returns true anyway. I confess that
> I've had some problems like this, and we chose not to use empty(), as
> sometimes 0 or false makes sense as a valid value.
>
That is exactly as the
On Sat, 14 Oct 2023 at 18:48, David Grudl wrote:
>
> A) The problem with nextFloat() is that the name creates a false
> expectation. Take a look at the following code:
> ```
> $randomizer = new \Random\Randomizer();
> $a = $randomizer->getFloat(100, 200); // number between 100..200
> $b =
Hi Derick,
Is there any reason why PHP does not use an automated certificate renewal
for lets encrypt?
Such as EFF-ACME-Certbot? [https://certbot.eff.org/]
On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 15:55, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> pecl.php.net now has a valid SSL/TLS certificate again. And it turns
Hi internals, don't know who is responsible for this, but within the last
10 minutes the certificate for pecl.php.net has expired and this is causing
builds to fail as we require installing rdkafka.
On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 14:12, Lanre Waju wrote:
> Dear PHP Internals,
>
> I am writing to propose a new feature for PHP that introduces the
> concept of structs. This feature aims to provide a more concise and
> expressive way to define and work with immutable data structures. Below
> is a
An extension of this, Looking on packagist. The namespace PHP is reserved,
in collaboration with PHP, Composer and Packagist. Official PHP packages
can use the /PHP/... root namespace.
And can be published on packagist under the PHP namespace
https://packagist.org/packages/php/ -- Note this URL
>
> The work to get started seems to be about:
>
> 1- Getting an RFC to approve this idea itself
> 2- Getting a repository to host the PHP package code.
> 3- CI/CD
> 4- Release Management
> 5- Versioning Strategy
> 6- Package naming convention
> 7- Distribution strategy (single package vs multiple
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 22:13, Timo Tijhof wrote:
>
>
> * Discourse. This is effectively the inverse of Google Groups and least
> like a "real" mailing list. I'd describe Discourse as a web discussion
> forum first, and mailing list second. Afaik it does offer full
> participation via email. By
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 20:41, Arvids Godjuks
wrote:
> Here's a question: Who is going to be in charge of maintaining the GitHub
> org and administrating it?
> As someone who does community management for a long long time, I forsee
> someone needing that to be their life for a project of this
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 20:54, Lynn wrote:
>
> Was this topic discussed only on the mailing list? Asking mailing list
> users if they like the mailing list is obviously going to skew the opinion
> into a direction of people being in favor of the mailing list.
>
I use the mailing list (rarely) to
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 19:42, Rowan Tommins wrote:
>
> Which brings me back to my earlier point: I wonder how much of the
> reaction is really about e-mail itself, and how much is just the
> documentation and sign-up forms you encounter *before* you hit the list.
> Because if it's the latter,
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 19:00, Reinis Rozitis wrote:
>
> Sadly, there isn't anything useful being discussed just some people being
> upset about why someone doesn't (immediately) want to move to their
> [favorite] platform what gives even more validation for those who are
> against it.
>
>
> p.s.
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 16:25, Alex Wells wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 6:15 PM Pierre wrote:
>
> > That was my 2 cents about all this. Maybe what the thread creator mean
> > is simply that the PHP development process is kind of hidden in this
> > list, and it's not that easy to reach or read
27 matches
Mail list logo
