Re: [PHP-DEV] RM decision on BUG #55801 / FR #36424
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 17:06:19 -0700, Stas Malyshev wrote: Hi! So, what is the status of this? I think we better revert it for 5.4 and look for solution that does not mess up existing code. Hi there! Yes, I received your mails, sorry for being quiet! I cooked up a patch which uses clean var_hashs or (un)serialize within __wakeup and __sleep. Tests pass, my test case in the bug produces a stack overflow, which is IMO expected. I'm just waiting for feedback of the bug reporter. Thanks, Mike -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: date_diff fixes status
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: What is the status of fixing date module with regard to TLA timezones handling - this code still fails: Daniel will be publishing an RFC today, after that we have what we want and can have a stab at fixing it. Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] php 5.4 next iteration
Hi! Since we have next release planned on 20th, and since we have at least three unsolved issues for 5.4 yet which we expect resolution soon: - is_a question - serialization changes - date fixes I think the release on 20th should be beta2 and we can start the RC cycle once these are resolved. BTW, if anyone remembers anything else that must be resolved before RC and isn't yet, please raise the flag. Also, it'd be great if we could get some attention to the missing documentation: https://wiki.php.net/todo/undoc54 -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php 5.4 next iteration
I would also like to have some decision on https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=54089 (there already was some discussion about this @ http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg53411.html but no consensus was reached). On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote: Hi! Since we have next release planned on 20th, and since we have at least three unsolved issues for 5.4 yet which we expect resolution soon: - is_a question - serialization changes - date fixes I think the release on 20th should be beta2 and we can start the RC cycle once these are resolved. BTW, if anyone remembers anything else that must be resolved before RC and isn't yet, please raise the flag. Also, it'd be great if we could get some attention to the missing documentation: https://wiki.php.net/todo/undoc54 -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php 5.4 next iteration
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote: Hi! Since we have next release planned on 20th, and since we have at least three unsolved issues for 5.4 yet which we expect resolution soon: - is_a question where is the question? You seem to be the only one to disagree with the revert and the proposed patch. Rasmus and other agreed on it already, here and the security list. please keep in mind that the security is a closed group so most of the readers don't know the discussion happening there, so maybe it would be a good idea to summarize the discussion here and maybe mention who are exactly Rasmus and other. - serialization changes BC break, it should be reverted. see http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg53939.html - date fixes Any ref or link on those please? see http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg53940.html imo the date related XFAILS should be fixed before 5.4 -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Re: [PHP-DEV] Ternary operator performance improvements
Hi, Le Monday 17 October 2011 15:07:30, Alain Williams a écrit : On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 08:08:56PM +0200, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote: Hi, I've already posted this patch and it has since been reviewed and improved. I'm re-posting it for discussion before eventually commiting it. The ternary operator always copies its second or third operand, which is very slow compared to an if/else when the operand is an array for example: Is that why the following does not work as I expected: $dbh = $how == 'r' ? ($dbh_r) : ($dbh_w); $dbh is NOT a reference to $dbh_r or $dbh_w. This is expected; http://docs.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.comparison.php explains it: Please note that the ternary operator is a statement, and that it doesn't evaluate to a variable, but to the result of a statement. This is why you can't assign the result of the ternary operator by reference. The patch doesn't change this. Best regards, -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php 5.4 next iteration
Hi! On 10/18/11 12:36 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: where is the question? You seem to be the only one to disagree with the revert and the proposed patch. Rasmus and other agreed on it already, here and the security list. The patch is still not applied. If nobody agrees with me - ok, apply it then. But this is a substantial change so I don't want to do it in RC phase. - serialization changes BC break, it should be reverted. Should be, but isn't yet. Michael says he has a fix for it. - date fixes Any ref or link on those please? All Date XFAILs, pretty much. If you intend to help Derick and Daniel look into it, I can give you more info (it was already discussed, but I don't want to spend time summarizing it unless it's needed). -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Ternary operator performance improvements
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:09:37PM +0200, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote: Hi, Le Monday 17 October 2011 15:07:30, Alain Williams a écrit : On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 08:08:56PM +0200, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote: Hi, I've already posted this patch and it has since been reviewed and improved. I'm re-posting it for discussion before eventually commiting it. The ternary operator always copies its second or third operand, which is very slow compared to an if/else when the operand is an array for example: Is that why the following does not work as I expected: $dbh = $how == 'r' ? ($dbh_r) : ($dbh_w); $dbh is NOT a reference to $dbh_r or $dbh_w. This is expected; http://docs.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.comparison.php explains it: It probably does, but it is quite subtle. I was expecting the above to work since it does in C -- although in C variable is an address which can be used in an expression ... the PHP '' operator is different, in spite of apparent similarities. Explained here, but still http://docs.php.net/manual/en/language.references.arent.php Please note that the ternary operator is a statement, and that it doesn't evaluate to a variable, but to the result of a statement. I'm not complaining. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] [RFC] DateTime and Daylight Saving Time Transitions
Hello! PHP's DateTime class has unexpected outcomes when dealing with the transitions between Daylight Saving Time and Standard Time. Properly defining, documenting and unit testing DateTime's behaviors is important for PHP's future. This document seeks agreement on what the expected behaviors should be. Please take a moment to review the RFC and post any questions or concerns here. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/datetime_and_daylight_saving_time Thanks, --Dan -- T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y data intensive web and database programming http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/ 4015 7th Ave #4, Brooklyn NY 11232 v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Ternary operator performance improvements
Hi! On 10/18/11 2:43 PM, Alain Williams wrote: It probably does, but it is quite subtle. I was expecting the above to work since it does in C -- although in Cvariable is an address which can be used in an expression ... the PHP '' operator is different, in spite of apparent similarities. Actually, in PHP standalone doesn't even make any sense. PHP has certain operations - assignment by reference (bind two names to one variable) and passing by reference (which is the same thing but cross-scope) and returning by reference (which again is the same thing but in opposite direction). But unlike C there's no operation taking reference because while C has pointers PHP doesn't have anything like that. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] is_a fix for 5.4 and HEAD
Supporting strings 'by default' in is_a() has the downside that it produces slightly unpredictable results. If you are accepting 'mixed' arguments, some of which may be strings, there is a slim chance that the string you accept will match the class or it's parent by accident. Personally if I did not believe that the barrier for a BC change has to be alot higher than 'prettier or consistent API', i would have suggested that is_subclass_of should be changed to be 'consistent', and safer. While the old justification for using is_a() over instanceof, has almost gone (it was the only way to write code that was portable to PHP4 PHP5.*, except for the annoying depreciation message). I still consider is_a(), especially with negative testing slightly clearer to read than instanceof. Regards Alan On Monday, October 17, 2011 09:22 PM, Jonathan Bond-Caron wrote: On Sun Oct 16 06:59 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: It definitely makes PHP worse by propagating inconsistent APIs. I created a patch against 5.4: https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug_id=55475patch=is_a_5.4_alternati verevision=latest The patch changes the behavior to: is_a(ab, b) // false is_a(ab, b, true) // autoload ab, autoload b -- false is_subclass_of(ab, b) // false is_subclass_of(ab, b, true) // autoload ab, autoload b -- false Both class names can be autoloaded but not by default Thoughts? -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
