Hi internals,
it's been a great eight months now for PHP 5.4. We released 5.4.0 final
in february and since then we were able to deliver a new PHP version
every month (thanks to the hard work from stas).
As most people know we do not include patches in 5.4 that will break
backwards
On 08.09.2012 13:49, David Soria Parra wrote:
Let's keep things simple here, stay on topic and debate
if we want to start with 5.5 and who can RM it.
Hey,
sounds like a really good plan and apart from the probably most-often
named disadvantage, getting people to switch (hard enough to get minor
Hi everybody,
with the release of PHP 5.4 a similar pattern happened as with the release of
5.3: while we want people to upgrade as fast as possible, it is often a bumpy
road for users to migrate to new versions. There are various reasons for it:
1.) Incompatible and hard to change codebases
Hi Ralph,
I still like the proposal.
Am 08.09.2012 um 07:12 schrieb Ralph Schindler ra...@ralphschindler.com:
[...]
But yes, I agree that runtime resolution only duplicates existing
behavior, so it isn't really necessary (you could argue thought that
self::class similarly also only replicates
What I find absolutely confusing is the use of Class vs. CLASS vs. class for
constant names. Let’s limit the translation to FQCN.
I will clean up the proposal make the examples more consistent (all lower
case). It's worth noting though, that this is reusing the reserved keyword
class which
hi Lars,
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Lars Strojny l...@strojny.net wrote:
with the release of PHP 5.4 a similar pattern happened as with the release of
5.3: while we want people to upgrade as fast as possible, it is often a bumpy
road for users to migrate to new versions. There are
Hi Pierre,
Am 08.09.2012 um 20:23 schrieb Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com:
[...]
3.) Upgrades are hard, let’s go shopping aka never change a running system
What do you mean here?
A general reluctance to change production systems because they work. But as I
said, not our problem.
[...]
Hi Ralph,
Am 08.09.2012 um 20:03 schrieb Ralph Schindler ra...@ralphschindler.com:
[...]
What I find absolutely confusing is the use of Class vs. CLASS vs. class for
constant names. Let’s limit the translation to FQCN.
I will clean up the proposal make the examples more consistent (all
On 09/08/2012 12:26 PM, Lars Strojny wrote:
That’s indeed a different topic but it would ease a lot of pain to have a
fully compatible APC from day one.
The first step to that is to make sure all new language features include
the necessary changes to APC. And despite what Pierre thinks, it
