Whichever one the newly developed features are going into these days.
Seems to be 5.3 or 5.4.
-Andrei
On Feb 24, 2008, at 4:03 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
To be clear, my statement was about the closures and not sexier
anonymous functions. I agree that we need to do an RFC on this
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (624 total including feature requests)
===[*Compile Issues]==
43389 Open configure ignoring --without-cdb flag
Hello there,
I am not sure here is the right place to mention this, but
I still think it will be cool, if there is some spell checking
before posting news on php.net. There are mistakes like
the word 'Addded' - perhaps should be 'Added'.
This thing lead me to the idea, of spell checker who logs
Hello Andi,
I mentioned something along those lines as well. And I guess we both come
from the side that a) we think the feature as such is useful and b) needs to
be implemented in a way that we can use as much of the engine
infrastructure as possible and c) not interfere with the way PHP
Hello Lukas,
Thursday, February 21, 2008, 9:41:10 AM, you wrote:
On 21.02.2008, at 03:26, Andi Gutmans wrote:
a)
I think Traits should be able to act as a self-contained behavior
which can always be expected to work. For example if I want a
Counter behavior I would like that not to
PHP 6 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (57 total including feature requests)
===[*General Issues]==
26771 Suspended register_tick_funtions crash under threaded webservers
Hello Andi,
my understanding was that we did not like the anon function syntax sugar
and could not agree on a feature set for closures upfront and thus decided
to disagree and not do anything. Now that the topic came up again it seems
that we actually should work on an agreeable featureset in a
managing Validate_HU PEAR package
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:00 AM, internals@lists.php.net wrote:
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Should these still be sent out?
-Hannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:00 AM, internals@lists.php.net wrote:
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Should these still be sent out?
I've just disabled them.
regards,
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl |
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Stefan Marr wrote:
jvlad schrieb:
in other words, why to introduce such a new thing as trait instead of using
classes and trait'ing them?
I've introduced it as a separate notion from classes to avoid misconception
and problems occurring from conflicting properties and
Hi,
Marcus Boerger schrieb:
Trait a {
function f() {}
}
Trait b {
function f() {}
}
class c {
uses a, b;
function f() {}
}
Reflection(c):
function \0a\0f function a::f
function \0b\0f function b::f
function ffunction f
All nicely callable using array syntax:
class d
Hi Michael,
Michael Stack schrieb:
Apologies for contacting you off list. I would like it if you would
consider the following additional alternative syntax for aliases.
has foo {
without bar, gaa; // exclusions
with zaa as zee, faa as fee; // with aliased methods
}
After you had posted
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Personally I prefer going with a wiki, because I do not have much affection
with CVS for these kinds of documents (actually I do think that the README's
should be in CVS, which is why I worked with Hannes on creating the current
php.net/reST
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Derick Rethans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Personally I prefer going with a wiki, because I do not have much affection
with CVS for these kinds of documents (actually I do think that the
README's
should be in
Hi!
The main part of the trait idea is to be able to solve conflicts
explicitly. Think this is the major contribution of traits and the
things being discussed here right now are not THIS kind of traits anymore.
What I still don't understand it's how you can solve these conflicts at
all.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Lokrain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello there,
I am not sure here is the right place to mention this, but
I still think it will be cool, if there is some spell checking
before posting news on php.net. There are mistakes like
the word 'Addded' - perhaps
Pierre Joye schrieb:
Limiting the RFC to existing php.net's member sound like a bad idea
and create CVS accounts only for a RFC does not sound any better.
I would rather use the wiki for the complete process. Once a RFC
reached a stable status, we can add it to a RFC repository.
Would agree
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Lokrain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello there,
I am not sure here is the right place to mention this, but
I still think it will be cool, if there is some spell checking
before posting news on php.net. There are mistakes like
the word 'Addded' - perhaps
Hi,
there is a lot of discussion going on about how traits should actually
work in PHP.
Currently, one of the main challenges seams to be to agree on a suitable
mechanism to avoid breaking traits and there behavior.
Eventually, there seams to be a large discomfiture on the excluding of
methods
Hi,
Stanislav Malyshev schrieb:
What I still don't understand it's how you can solve these conflicts at
all. I.e., suppose you have Counter API and DBConnection API on each of
which you have clean() method - for Counter it resets it to zero and for
DB it resets authentication details. How it
Hi,
OpenID is a system gaining more and more support in the industry so PHP
should have better support for it, too. some time ago Wez proposed[1] a
patch for OpenSSL exporting some big-number-math and crypto stuff from
there. Some people thought that that's no clean solution and it would be
On 25/02/2008, Stefan Marr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
there is a lot of discussion going on about how traits should actually
work in PHP.
Currently, one of the main challenges seams to be to agree on a suitable
mechanism to avoid breaking traits and there behavior.
Eventually, there
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Johannes Schlüter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
OpenID is a system gaining more and more support in the industry so PHP
should have better support for it, too. some time ago Wez proposed[1] a
patch for OpenSSL exporting some big-number-math and crypto
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 23:11 +0100, Pierre Joye wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Johannes Schlüter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
OpenID is a system gaining more and more support in the industry so PHP
should have better support for it, too. some time ago Wez proposed[1] a
Am 25.02.2008 um 20:33 schrieb Stefan Marr:
Hi,
there is a lot of discussion going on about how traits should actually
work in PHP.
Currently, one of the main challenges seams to be to agree on a
suitable
mechanism to avoid breaking traits and there behavior.
Eventually, there seams to be
Stefan Marr wrote:
snip
To get rid of exclude and rename I would like to propose the following:
//Example from the RFC with the cross-over conflict to be solved
trait A {
public function smallTalk() {
echo 'a';
}
public function bigTalk() {
echo 'A';
}
}
trait B {
27 matches
Mail list logo
