Re: [PHP-DEV] PCRE 8.31
hi! On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote: On 10/18/2012 03:47 AM, Anatoliy Belsky wrote: Hi, as requested in the issue #63284, I've produced a patch for PCRE 8.31 upgrade. Tests has passed for me on 5.3/5.4/master ts and nts, though anybody willing to perform additional tests is welcomed. More tests will be performed next days anyway. There is also a question hanging in the air - would it be OK to commit that to 5.3 and 5.4 branches? Yes, this is ok. Optionally bundled libs like this is a special case because many distros choose to not use the bundled version which means some of our users end up using newer (and more often older) versions of the library anyway. We could make a case for not doing it in 5.3 anymore since that is getting close to sunset at this point, but Johannes should make that call I think. The tests pass in our labs using this patch. Anatoliy, please go ahead with the commit, even for 5.3 (we can discuss later when we stop to update bundled libs in 5.3, in the EOL discussions :). Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-QA] Parallel run-tests
Could just as easily launch N sub-processes from run-tests.php as well. I compile php in a VM with -j 40 on a dual core VM powered by quad core chip... The number of simultaneous tests doesn't need to line up with CPU counts... -Clint On Oct 18, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote: hi! On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:41 PM, zoe slattery aparac...@gmail.com wrote: Nuno - just a PS to the last note. It is (mainly) the task allocation across processors which means that running tests in parallel on a 4-way machine is not 4 times as fast as running them in sequence. Here are some results from a run on my 2-way Mac - http://static.inky.ws/image/3257/image.jpg. The blocks of colour are just representations of the time it takes a group to run - and Open office is allocating the colors randomly so they don't have any significance. I've annotated the chart to show which groups are taking a long time The net is that P0 runs its half of the tasks and then just hangs about waiting for P1 to finish :-/. I have added a 'debug' flag to the code which will print information about how tasks are allocated if anyone wants to try on a 4 or 8 way. Given that there are not many groups that take a long time to run the simplest thing seems to be to map these to specific processors - that's easy enough and requires no difficult code. There are more elegant solutions of course. Have you considered doing it using a daemon and php as client (to launch tasks and the tests)? Gearman or even a webserver could do a better job without the hassle to deal with what you are experiencing now. We do that using webservers in our labs to test all phpt and various apps. That being said, to multiply cores never bring a linear speed increase, even less in this case. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- 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] Wiki account
Got an email? -Clint On Oct 18, 2012, at 7:29 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.commailto:kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Clint Priest cpri...@zerocue.commailto:cpri...@zerocue.com wrote: Who's the karma keeper anyways? Do we get a score? ;) I'm not 100% sure, but I think the Hindu god Ishvara is the person you're looking for. --Kris
Re: [PHP-DEV] Wiki account
? On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Clint Priest cpri...@zerocue.com wrote: Got an email? -Clint On Oct 18, 2012, at 7:29 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Clint Priest cpri...@zerocue.com wrote: Who's the karma keeper anyways? Do we get a score? ;) I'm not 100% sure, but I think the Hindu god Ishvara is the person you're looking for. --Kris -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] error handler
Hello, Can anybody show me, where in the core the user error handler is called? The mechanism of how it's called... Thanks, A.
Re: [PHP-DEV] error handler
Check the zend_error function in zend.c http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_4/Zend/zend.c#1106 On 19 October 2012 14:46, Adi Mutu adi_mut...@yahoo.com wrote: Hello, Can anybody show me, where in the core the user error handler is called? The mechanism of how it's called... Thanks, A. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Accessors v1.1 - v1.2 Summary
Hey everyone, seems like the conversations have died down and I've attempted to go back through all of the emails and produce a 1.1 - 1.2 document which summarizes what I believe are decided, being debated, issues, todos, etc. Pierre had pointed out that I had partially changed the as-implemented document which no longer reflected what the fork implements. So... I have reverted that document to the 1.1 version. For the TODO items I will start to tackle those which are not dependent upon some undecided changes. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented/change-requests Please take a look and lets continue the discussion. Lastly, in order to keep the discussions of this large change, can we keep/maintain separate threads discussing each of the major points? For example if you want to talk about the internal accessor method visibility, create an email chain like Accessors v1.2 : internal accessor method visibility Hopefully we can keep the emails in each thread on topic. Thanks! -Clint
[PHP-DEV] [RFC] Accessors : read-only / write-only keywords
I had thought of a deviation on some of the ideas presented to get rid of
read-only/write-only while still keeping the ability to maintain their effect,
if we so decide that the feature is wanted. Here it is:
class TimePeriod {
private $Seconds;
public $Hours {
get() { return $this-Hours; }
final set NULL;
}
}
It's close to what's been suggested but is pretty clear that there IS NO SETTER
it could not be called within the class and since its final it cannot be
over-ridden. I've included this in the change tracking document.
Thoughts?
-Clint
