On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Alex Aulbach alex.aulb...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/7/23 Sanford Whiteman
swhitemanlistens-softw...@cypressintegrated.com:
I think that you can compare the situation to the short if syntax ($a
$b
? $c : $d)
Not sure I understand... that *is* the situation
On 7/16/12 5:29 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Amaury Bouchard ama...@amaury.net
wrote:
Yes, but only if you have to write an accessor.
If you just want an attribute that is:
- readable from everywhere
- writable from the current class only
On 7/20/12 2:33 AM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey all,
So I've been thinking about this for a while. Here's what I've come up
with:
1. We want to maintain loose typing, so implementing a different API on
string than on int types would be bad.
2. We want to retain backwards
My first thought was how could someone reading the code see, that it
is a generator?
Somewhat snarky answer: By documenting the code in the first place.
Yeah, I know, we all inherit other people's code and the other person never
writes comments.
I don't think this is as big of a problem in
2012/7/23 André Rømcke andre.rom...@ez.no
I think these two proposals can be synced up, what if:
public readonly $a;
Is shorthand for:
public $a { get; protected set; }
And when no function is defined, no function overhead is added.
Well, this code:
public read-only $a;
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't really
make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal (perhaps
too proper?).
Introduction
I am proposing a function, named array_pick(), which takes a single (array)
argument,
(resending because of broken formatting)
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't really
make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal (perhaps
too proper?).
Introduction
I am proposing a function, named
On 22/07/12 04:08, Kris Craig wrote:
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Andrew Faulds ajf...@googlemail.comwrote:
If you think 1.1 =/= 1.01 you're sure using some weird version numbers.
Only 1.0.1 would be smaller.
Has anyone seen these weird version ordering schemes in practise? On any
major
Andrew,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
(resending because of broken formatting)
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't
really
make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal
(perhaps
On 23 ביול 2012, at 19:05, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
Andrew,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
(resending because of broken formatting)
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't
really
make the case for that
Why bloat the core library of functions when you can perform: $randomValue
= $array[array_rand($array)]; Am I missing the point?
I don't think there is a real need for this personally it's just language
bloat. Look at Java (I know it's very different) but it provides a huge
amount of built in
test
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Nuked test
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 23/07/12 06:03, Alex Aulbach wrote:
In other words: You want to introduce something, which we are glad not
to need anymore. :)
Ok. And as I said, it is a proposal so… ;-).
Next topic: rescue or finally keywoard?
Best regards :-).
--
Ivan Enderlin
Developer of Hoa
http://hoa.42/ or
rescue is the exact same concept as catch
On Jul 24, 2012 3:41 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa
ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net wrote:
On 23/07/12 06:03, Alex Aulbach wrote:
In other words: You want to introduce something, which we are glad not
to need anymore. :)
Ok. And as I said, it is a
15 matches
Mail list logo
