On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Jakub Zelenka <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Johannes Schlüter <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 13:11 +0100, Jakub Zelenka wrote: >>> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Johannes Schlüter >>> > <[email protected]>wrote: >>> > >>> > > I was a bit confused as zif/zim is wrapped by macros and affects >>> only OO >>> > > stuff ... and PHP 4 and OO sounds unlikely >>> > > >>> > > >>> > There are these lines in the code that make a compile error >>> > PHP_METHOD(fannOO, __set) >>> > ... >>> > zend_internal_function fe_set, fe_get; >>> > fe_set.handler = ZEND_FN(fannOO___set); >>> > ... >>> > error: ‘zif_fannOO___set’ undeclared >>> >>> Ah, that's indeed a ug in the code. That should not be done. function != >>> method. :) >>> Anyways not directly related to the original issue. So what do you >>> guysprefer: >>> >>> - Reusing the name >>> or >>> - using fann2 >>> >>> johannes >>> >>> >> > Sorry for top posting in previous email, please ignore it... > > > Personally I would prefer reusing the name. I don't think that there are > any users of the old extension as it hasn't been working for a long time > and the libfann 1 is not available anyway. We could still leave the old > sources for downloading. I would just release a new version of the > extension which would be 2.0 (that actually shows that it's for the new > version of libfann 2). I could add a note to the description that API for > 2.0 is not backward compatible with 1.x as it is for example in imagick > extension. I am not against fann2 but the reusing name in this case > probably makes more sense and will be easier to maintain. Is it ok with > everyone? > > Jakub > > Hello, I was thinking about fann2 and it probably doesn't make sense. It's a very specialized extension and I really don't think that the reusing of name could break anything. It would be probably a bit confusing for users. Also Evan has already confirmed that he agrees with the reusing of name. I have requested a PECL account (bukka). If there are no objections, please could you approve the account request and give me a karma for maintaining the fann extension and committing its documentaion? Thanks a lot! Regards Jakub Thanks
