+1 to keep PHP-CLI with implicit_flush.

Ilia

On October 27, 2002 09:05 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Thank you for the detailed explanation, I'm sure everybody understands it
> now.
>
> Let's go for the voting phase.  I vote we keep PHP-CLI with implicit_flush
> on by default.  You vote against.
>
> Can we get some other votes now (not opinions, everything was already said
> a dozen times, just votes to get this over with).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Zeev
>
> At 15:11 25/10/2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> >Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >>At 09:15 25/10/2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> >>>Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >>>>You print something, it doesn't print out.  How is it trivial to solve
> >>>>this?  If you happen to know that there's IO buffering and that there's
> >>>>a function called flush() then maybe it trivial, but then there are the
> >>>>other million users who don't.  Hence the idea of setting is to
> >>>>implicit flush for the masses, who not only don't know about the
> >>>>existence of flush(), but also don't know why it's even necessary.
> >>>
> >>>Ok. If we are argue about what is mass or not
> >>>
> >>>Don't forget about
> >>>
> >>>  - millions(?) of _current_ PHP users who are used to
> >>> implicit_flush=off by default.
> >>
> >>Few of them use CLI.
> >
> >As I mentioned already, people are used to implicit_off=off and
> >it's the default of other SAPIs, therefore, it's not intuitive
> >for existing users.
> >
> >If we aren't care about much about existing users base,
> >I think we should set short_tag=Off by default, but you're
> >insisting it should be on even if much fewer people are
> >using. I'm confused.
> >
> >People expects PHP/CLI behave like Apache SAPI, CGI SAPI, etc.
> >
> >Well, if I weren't developer and didn't know discussion,
> >I'll certainly write bug report that implicit flush is enabled
> >wrongly.
> >
> >>>  - millions of decent programmers who are used to _usual_ behavior.
> >>
> >>I consider myself a decent programmer, and I also consider the need to
> >>flush explicitly extremely annoying.  Moreover, many PHP programmers (if
> >>not most) aren't used to this 'usual' behavior, because they either never
> >>programmed in another language, or they still didn't bump into that
> >>specific behavior.
> >
> >Don't you think flushing is needed only very limited applications?
> >i.e. We don't write interactive CUI applications much now a days.
> >
> >>>  - millions of scripts/echo/print don't need automatic flush at all.
> >>>    i.e. much fewer number of script/echo/print need auto flushing.
> >>
> >>It doesn't matter.  When you're screwed by the lack of implicit flush,
> >>it's much worse than a mere slow down.
> >
> >Hmm. Since console is line buffered. There aren't many thing that
> >is missed by implicit flushing.
> >
> >>>Please list programming languages (i.e. not shell) that do
> >>>automatic/inefficient/unneeded flushing by default in program mode.
> >>
> >>Read my fingertips - PHP IN CLI MODE.  There's one, that's the only one I
> >>care about.
> >
> >My point is we should learn from many smart peoples designs' of
> >languages.
> >
> >>>If we are argue about difficulty of flushing,
> >>
> >>We're not.  We're arguing about the obscurity of the problem.
> >
> >implicit_flush=On is obscure for current users.
> >
> >Suppose "not flushing" is extremely obscure, but default is better
> >to set which is better/suitable for more occasions and is better to
> >be consistent with other SAPIs.
> >
> >Is this the main point of auto flushing?
> >If there are other points, please list them.
> >
> >--
> >Yasuo Ohgaki


-- 
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to