php-general Digest 16 Nov 2011 12:13:49 -0000 Issue 7570
Topics (messages 315704 through 315710):
Re: Think I found a PHP bug
315704 by: Jim Lucas
Re: Safari and PDF
315705 by: HallMarc Websites
315708 by: Tamara Temple
315709 by: Tim Streater
315710 by: HallMarc Websites
Re: Sniping on the List
315706 by: Shawn McKenzie
315707 by: Tamara Temple
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-subscr...@lists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-unsubscr...@lists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-gene...@lists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
On 11/15/2011 2:58 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 15 Nov 2011 at 22:34, Geoff Shang <ge...@quitelikely.com> wrote:
>
>> The bug is that if a server's timezone is set to Europe/London and you
>> don't set an explicit timezone in your script, if it's winter time in
>> the UK, PHP thinks the timezone is UTC instead of Europe/London.
>
> I find I need to do this:
>
> date_default_timezone_set (@date_default_timezone_get ());
>
> in all my scripts since 5.x.x to avoid rude messages.
>
> --
> Cheers -- Tim
>
>
Also, I recalled something from the early 5.1.0 version that was related to the
introduction of the date_timezone_set() function. So, from there I searched
Google for "php changelog" and found the changelog for php v5. Then I searched
that document for 'date_' and found that under the 5.1.0 they added the above
function. How it is stated, it makes me think that PHP now requires you to call
this function prior to any use of other date functions. I cannot find anything
in the php manual confirming my last statement. YMMV
1 http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.date-timezone-set.php
2 http://php.net/ChangeLog-5.php#5.1.0
--
Jim Lucas
http://www.cmsws.com/
http://www.cmsws.com/examples/
http://www.bendsource.com/
C - (541) 408-5189
O - (541) 323-9113
H - (541) 323-4219
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
And in conclusion; sorry, I get uppity after a long day LOL. It's as I already
thought; the answer is NO. So here is what I will do for any of you looking for
an answer and stumbling across my slight rant, I will detect if it is Safari
5.1.x and then just remove the view link and leave them with a download link
only. Sucks if you ask me.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:04:42 -0500, HallMarc Websites
<m...@hallmarcwebsites.com> sent:
On the face of it, if you are writing a PHP application for others to use,
*forcing* a particular behaviour on them (on *their* own machine) is
probably not a good idea. Why not let the user deal with this as
they see fit?
One can go way too far trying to ensure a uniform experience among users,
who may not even care what other users are experiencing. One size *never*
fits all.
On the face of it; Apple needs to stop mucking with what already
works! The issue is this, Apple in all of its wonderful glory
decided to drop support for pdf via the acrobat plugin. Didn't
bother to tell anyone about this. You now need to use their Preview
feature ONLY if you want to view a pdf in your browser. Otherwise
you get nothing but a big white empty screen. No notice, no warning,
just a big white screen. Know what I've been getting from my
clients? Grief! I'm the one writing the code for their site and
since Apple can do no wrong it's me that must be the idiot.
[>]
Sorry, just sick and tired of Apple trying to bring everything under
their tightly locked proprietary software mitts.
As to why do I want to do this... because it is better than telling
my client that they need to give their clients instruction on how to
view something they have been comfortably using and viewing without
issue until recently.
Well, okay, I can understand how Apple changing how something works
affects things downstream if developers and subsequently end users
have to change the way they are doing something they have been used
to. As I never (ever!) downloaded the adobe acrobat reader software on
my mac, I never experienced this. As far as I know, when I get a PDF,
it's always downloaded and I view it in Preview or Skim.
The more cardinal point that the one I gave above about giving end
users choice is never force an end user to change how they do
something they're used to doing.
My point is also largely philosophical. On practicalities, one does
what one must.
--
Tamara Temple
aka tamouse__
May you never see a stranger's face in the mirror
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 16 Nov 2011 at 00:43, HallMarc Websites <m...@hallmarcwebsites.com> wrote:
> And in conclusion; sorry, I get uppity after a long day LOL. It's as I already
> thought; the answer is NO. So here is what I will do for any of you looking
> for an answer and stumbling across my slight rant, I will detect if it is
> Safari 5.1.x and then just remove the view link and leave them with a download
> link only. Sucks if you ask me.
I have to say that I still really have no clue what you are talking about. Why
would anyone with OS X want Acrobat Reader, when there is a perfectly good [1]
application (note: application, not "feature") available that does the task
just as well. And when the PDF shows up in Safari you can choose to view it
there or open in Preview. I only do the latter if I intend to save the PDF,
which is not always the case.
[1] Preview also allows me to adjust images when I can't be bothered to fire up
Elements.
--
Cheers -- Tim
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I have to say that I still really have no clue what you are talking about. Why
> would anyone with OS X want Acrobat Reader, when there is a perfectly
> good [1] application (note: application, not "feature") available that does
> the
> task just as well. And when the PDF shows up in Safari you can choose to
> view it there or open in Preview. I only do the latter if I intend to save the
> PDF, which is not always the case.
>
> [1] Preview also allows me to adjust images when I can't be bothered to fire
> up Elements.
>
> --
> Cheers -- Tim
[>]
Seems strange that you are given a choice. My clients have been telling me that
they are told to get the latest Acrobat Reader by Safari. Which they have done
(again why allow a plugin that isn't supported get installed to begin with)
only to be told the same exact thing the next time the click on a pdf. Anyway,
I realize this topic is now slightly off list.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 11/14/2011 11:51 AM, George Langley wrote:
> Am concerned over the number of posts that appear to be from people
> trying to over-inflate their self-importance. If you are the world's
> best coder, then help those of us who aren't. If you happen to know a
> better way to do something that I'm struggling with, then please
> share it. But if you just want to take pot shots at us, then please
> keep your comments to yourself.
>
> To that end, I wish to thank Ashley Sheridan, Daniel P. Brown, Tedd
> Sperling and Tommy Pham, to name but just a few of those who have
> submitted incredibly-helpful posts, that I have kept for reference.
> Your contributions are very much appreciated - thanks.
>
>
I will NOT keep my pot shots to myself. As the world's BEST coder I
should be afforded, nay, entitled, the luxury to comment however I see
fit! Especially to sixth century technology idiots such as yourself.
Now, if you have ANY idea who I am or of my importance in this
community, you will craft a carefully worded apology and then cease
posting here for eternity! By omission, I will assume that I am not
appreciated and take action to see that you are hereby banned from the
Internet. You're messing with the wrong guy!
--
Thanks!
-Shawn
http://www.spidean.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:40:59 -0600, Shawn McKenzie
<nos...@mckenzies.net> sent:
On 11/14/2011 11:51 AM, George Langley wrote:
Am concerned over the number of posts that appear to be from people...
...
You're messing with the wrong guy!
You forgot your punctus percontavius. βΈ®
--- End Message ---
