Hi Jorge,
On Mon, September 15, 2014 22:25, Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
Stephen asked me to check in your list, but I don't see anything new, so
does anybody have any idea? Signature
On 9/15/2014 3:32 PM, Stephen Zarkos wrote:
Hi,
-Original Message-
From: Jorge F. Hernandez
On 16 Sep 2014, at 10:16, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
Shifts by negative number may make sense. (N -1) = (N 1)
At least receiving false from shift is not very pleasant.
The problem is that changing from the current behaviour (undefined in C, but
typically a shift by (PHP_INT_MAX -
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net wrote:
Hi Nikita,
Are you sure about this? I can set memory_limit to -1, which is then cast
to size_t, resulting in a limit ZEND_LONG_MAX.
I tried the following in a 32bit VM with -dmemory_limit=-1 and got a
segfault:
you already made silent break for N 64 and N 64, but it may be
explained as more consistent behaviour.
I don't see a big difference with negative shifts.
The real thing that I don't like - is a boolean result. Warning is not a
big problem.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 1:23 PM,
On 16 September 2014 11:05, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
you already made silent break for N 64 and N 64, but it may be
explained as more consistent behaviour.
I don't see a big difference with negative shifts.
The real thing that I don't like - is a boolean result. Warning is not a
On Tue, September 16, 2014 12:03, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Anatol Belski a...@php.net
mailto:a...@php.net wrote:
Hi Nikita,
Are you sure about this? I can set memory_limit to -1, which is then
cast to size_t, resulting in a limit ZEND_LONG_MAX.
I tried
On 16 Sep 2014, at 11:19, Chris Wright c...@daverandom.com wrote:
On 16 September 2014 11:05, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
you already made silent break for N 64 and N 64, but it may be
explained as more consistent behaviour.
I don't see a big difference with negative shifts.
All
The return value of the DOMDocument::load* family of methods currently
varies depending on whether it was invoked statically or as an
instance method - when invoked on an instance it returns bool, and
when invoked statically it returns the implicitly created instance or
FALSE on error.
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4
x64, I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got a
white screen when trying to access phpinfo() to check, I also tested
uploading a 6GB file (after changing memory_limit back to 3.5G - x86
maximum) and
On 16 Sep 2014, at 14:40, Jorge F. Hernandez jfh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4 x64,
I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got a white
screen when trying to access phpinfo() to check, I also tested uploading a
Where can I get the master branch?
I just went to http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/master/ and all I
saw was x86.
Thanks,
Signature
On 9/16/2014 9:46 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 14:40, Jorge F. Hernandez jfh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my
Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4
x64, I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got a
white screen when trying to access phpinfo() to check, I also tested
uploading a 6GB file (after changing memory_limit back
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
Dear list,
I have opened voting on this RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/switch.default.multiple#vote
The RFC is very short so I will not summarize it here.
Voting will remain open for 10 days and will close on Monday,
On 16 Sep 2014, at 15:13, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
The vote passed unambiguously in favor of the RFC, 28 votes to none.
Thanks to everyone who participated.
Since it passed, are you going to merge into master soon?
Also, you should probably amend the master branch of the spec in
Dear list,
I've always been bothered by the fact that we call type declarations
'hints', as if they aren't enforced. They have always been enforced
and we don't have an option to turn them off.
I'm wondering if we want to move away from that name to something
else. I have two RFCs already that
Hi,
On Tue, September 16, 2014 15:54, Christoph Becker wrote:
Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4
x64, I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got
a white screen when trying to access phpinfo() to check, I
Hi!
Here are my thoughts.
The general concept should be called Optional Type Declarations, to replace
“Type Hinting. They are type declarations, and they are optional. Thus the
name. For the things themselves, they’re just Type Declarations, to replace
“Type Hints. So, for example:
“I am a
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
Hi!
Here are my thoughts.
The general concept should be called Optional Type Declarations, to replace
“Type Hinting. They are type declarations, and they are optional. Thus the
name. For the things themselves, they’re just
On 16 Sep 2014, at 16:24, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
The general concept should be called Optional Type Declarations, to replace
“Type Hinting. They are type declarations, and they are optional. Thus the
name. For
On 9/16/2014 11:14 AM, Anatol Belski wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, September 16, 2014 15:54, Christoph Becker wrote:
Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4
x64, I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got
a white screen
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 15:13, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
The vote passed unambiguously in favor of the RFC, 28 votes to none.
Thanks to everyone who participated.
Since it passed, are you going to merge into master soon?
On 9/16/2014 11:14 AM, Anatol Belski wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, September 16, 2014 15:54, Christoph Becker wrote:
Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache 2.4
x64, I just tried to put a memory_limit higher than 3584M and I got
a white screen
On 16 September 2014 16:14, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote:
I made a build from the current revision
http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/master-f469dc74/ so anyone
curious can easy snuffle :) It contains all the currently ported exts +
debug symbols, no PGO. Please catch up
On 9/16/14, 9:11 AM, Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
On 9/16/2014 11:14 AM, Anatol Belski wrote:
I made a build from the current revision
http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/master-f469dc74/ so anyone
curious can easy snuffle :) It contains all the currently ported exts +
debug symbols,
Hi Jorge,
On Tue, September 16, 2014 18:11, Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
On 9/16/2014 11:14 AM, Anatol Belski wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, September 16, 2014 15:54, Christoph Becker wrote:
Jorge F. Hernandez wrote:
I am running PHP 5.6.0 x64 on my Windows Server 2008 R2 with Apache
2.4
x64, I
On 16 September 2014 17:25, Leigh lei...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the difference between the build you put up, and the builds in
http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/master/ ?
Since I am home now and can test. I'll answer my own question - builds
in snaps/master are still 32 bit builds.
--
On Tue, September 16, 2014 18:25, Leigh wrote:
On 16 September 2014 16:14, Anatol Belski anatol@belski.net wrote:
I made a build from the current revision
http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/master-f469dc74/ so anyone
curious can easy snuffle :) It contains all the currently
On 10 Sep 2014, at 10:31, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:58 AM, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 8 September 2014 07:56, Christoph Becker cmbecke...@gmx.de wrote:
+1 on ?? — there's precedent for it, and it means we don't have to
explain why the
On 16 September 2014 11:34, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
By popular demand, I’ve changed the RFC to instead propose a ?? operator,
after Nikita Popov generously donated a working ?? patch. In doing so, the
RFC is renamed “Null Coalesce Operator”.
Please read it:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 19:38, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 16 September 2014 11:34, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
By popular demand, I’ve changed the RFC to instead propose a ?? operator,
after Nikita Popov generously donated a working ?? patch. In doing so, the
RFC is renamed
This will be a nice addition. Kudos to you!
Is there an issue targeting next minor for this? (assuming there is one)
On 16 Sep 2014, at 19:55, Shashank Kumar shashankkumar...@gmail.com wrote:
This will be a nice addition. Kudos to you!
Really, you should thank Nikita, not me. He wrote the patch. ^^
Is there an issue targeting next minor for this? (assuming there is one)
Well, the patch is written for
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. September 2014 17:26
An: Levi Morrison
Cc: internals
Betreff: Re: [PHP-DEV] Renaming type-hints to something else?
On 16 Sep 2014, at 16:24, Levi Morrison le...@php.net wrote:
On Tue,
Really, you should thank Nikita, not me. He wrote the patch. ^^
He gets my bag of thanks for many things.
Well, the patch is written for master. It could be back ported, but I
don’t know how.
Also, even if there is a 5.7, it sounds like it will consist purely of
bug fixes and E_DEPRECATED
Andrea Faulds wrote on 16.09.2014 20:34:
On 10 Sep 2014, at 10:31, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:58 AM, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 8 September 2014 07:56, Christoph Becker cmbecke...@gmx.de wrote:
+1 on ?? — there's precedent for it, and it
On 16 Sep 2014, at 20:28, Thomas Bley ma...@thomasbley.de wrote:
What are the pros and cons of a new operator vs. a new function? For example,
MySQL has a coalesce() function:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/comparison-operators.html#function_coalesce
A function is useless as it
Sorry, I mean to implement coalesce() as a token like isset() ?
Regards,
Thomas
Andrea Faulds wrote on 16.09.2014 21:30:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 20:28, Thomas Bley ma...@thomasbley.de wrote:
What are the pros and cons of a new operator vs. a new function? For example,
MySQL has a coalesce()
Andrea Faulds wrote:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 19:38, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 16 September 2014 11:34, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
By popular demand, I’ve changed the RFC to instead propose a ?? operator,
after Nikita Popov generously donated a working ?? patch. In doing so,
2014-09-16 22:00 GMT+02:00 Christoph Becker cmbecke...@gmx.de:
Andrea Faulds wrote:
On 16 Sep 2014, at 19:38, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 16 September 2014 11:34, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
By popular demand, I’ve changed the RFC to instead propose a ?? operator,
after
On 16 Sep 2014, at 21:46, Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink
ro...@kingsquare.nl wrote:
As a userland point of view on this: will this have a shorthand?
No.
i.e.
what will happen if i leave out the second part?
ie.
$var = $_GET['test'] ?? ;
would that be the same as
$var =
40 matches
Mail list logo
