[PHP-DEV] CVS Account Request: guang
I try to learn some more php from you. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] PHP_4_2_0 Win32
Hi Sebastian, Could you please change back the name of cgi executable from php-cgi.exe to php.exe in the PHP_4_2_0 branch? This in order to synchronize with the Unix build where it was decided to hide the cli version. I would do it myself but I don't feel confident messing with win32 build system. If you cannot make it in time for RC3 I would give it a try. Edin -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php4 /ext/mysql/libmysql strto.c strtoll.c strtoull.c
Andi Gutmans wrote: andiSun Apr 7 16:49:10 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/ext/mysql/libmysqlstrto.c strtoll.c strtoull.c Log: - Fix build with Visual Studio .NET. The MySQL team said they'll commit - their fix a long time ago and never did. One day they'll update the - whole MySQL client library. MFH? -- Sebastian Bergmann http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/ Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: aggregate() und overload()
Andrei Zmievski wrote: Please expound on this. I would like to hear specific problems you see existing with __get_x() callbacks. As of now, this is just an unspecified bad feeling of mine. I only can back up this with the two times we had special names which were variable in PHP: Both attempts at them failed horribly: - We had (have, until ZE 2, if I am not mistaken) variable named constructors (ctors named after the class). These had a number of design flaws in PHP 3, which were fixed in PHP 4, at the cost of an overly complex ruleset for constructor names. Had we chosen stable names for constructors, we'd gotten the same effect with a single rule for ctor names. - We had (until very recently) variable names for imported variables amidst our global namespace. We earned a number of security problems due to admittedly stupid code, which swayed the PTBs to finally disable registering globals by default. I cannot come up with a bomb script right now, but I am reasonably sure that __get_x() will backfire at some time as well. Kristian -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] PATH_INFO doesn't work
hi I've got a problem with the PATH_INFO environment variable on various servers. If I try to call a script named 'info.php' the following way '/info.php/xyz', the PATH_INFO variable should contain 'xyz', right? But it doesn't work in all cases. Seems like it's OK on servers with PHP compiled as Apache module. But if PHP is installed as CGI, on some servers it works, but in most cases I get an Error 500 or an Error 404. Can anybody tell me the reason for this behaviour? Perhaps a configuration issue? Thanks Tom -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:50, brad lafountain wrote: --- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:35, brad lafountain wrote: What would be wrong with having the *_SQL_* objects be a member of the *_Connection* classes? What you're describing here is object aggregation. What do you mean... Im saying that the SQL implementation is a member or the connection class.. Nothing to do with aggergation. aggergation would mean the methods of the sql imp would be apart of the connection class not a member. Im still not convinced that aggergation is usefull. Object aggregation in general is a technique where you have some functionality in objects you forward calls to, a pretty common technique. You can of course do that in PHP today, but it's slow (lots of userland method calls) and high on maintenance (if an aggregated class gets a new method, you must make a new wrapper in the forwarding class, etc). In my opinion, providing native support for this in an efficient way makes a lot of sense for PHP. - Stig -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 /main main.c
Jani Taskinen wrote: sniperMon Apr 8 03:58:47 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/mainmain.c Log: upload_max_filesize can only be set in php.ini There should be a NEWS entry, too. There may be some bug reports for this change, especially from hosting service users. -- Yasuo Ohgaki -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 /main main.c
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: Jani Taskinen wrote: sniper Mon Apr 8 03:58:47 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/main main.c Log: upload_max_filesize can only be set in php.ini There should be a NEWS entry, too. There may be some bug reports for this change, especially from hosting service users. I dont think that's needed... it did never work anyways. It makes little sense to set it after the script received the upload uploads are even received before the script is compiled. regards, Derick --- Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/registry/SLCB276UZU8B --- PHP: Scripting the Web - [EMAIL PROTECTED] All your branches are belong to me! SRM: Script Running Machine - www.vl-srm.net --- -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: CVS Account Request: guang
Guang_chen_us wrote: I try to learn some more php from you. You don't need CVS account to learn :) -- Yasuo Ohgaki -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 /main main.c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: Jani Taskinen wrote: sniper Mon Apr 8 03:58:47 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/main main.c Log: upload_max_filesize can only be set in php.ini There should be a NEWS entry, too. There may be some bug reports for this change, especially from hosting service users. I dont think that's needed... it did never work anyways. It makes little sense to set it after the script received the upload uploads are even received before the script is compiled. regards, Derick Ah. Ok if it didn't work, no need to mention :) I know file should be recieved fist. It's not the point for upload_max_filesize, I suppose. What about per dir setting? It didn't work, also? -- Yasuo Ohgaki -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] declaring arrays.
Hi! I am new on this list, and i have no big experiences in php. Now i am writing a script, what is counting some records in 5 MySQL table. Like: 1st table: i will have some date format string: 2000-11, and 2001-05 2nd table: 2000-11 3rd table: 2001-05, 2002-03 etc.. i need to collect all the different dates. I thought i will collect them into an array. How can i declare an array dinamically ? /If this question could be better on another list, please write me/ I also tried to search in the archive, but i confused there... Thx Vaso -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
brad lafountain wrote: Unless someone could give me a real reason that aggerate is better than MI. Aggregation does at runtime what MI does at compile time. Delaying the decision to do something is usually an enable for specific applications. Examples are the signal/slot mechanism based call-models in Gnome and Qt vs. virtual function tables in C++. The decision which implementation for a method is being called is delayed to the actual point in time when a call is being made, enabling a much more flexible component model and much better reuse. The cost for doing things late is worse typechecking, errors are potentially caught only at call-time, not at compile-time (with Qt, it probably is link-time, due to the way it is implemented). The same goes with aggregation. Aggregation allows me to write a class Soaping, which implements a SOAP RPC Client and a SOAPFactory class, which manufactures objects of any class and aggregates Soaping into them: I could include_once() any unknown class, create an instance and use PHPs introspective functions to create a list of functions and instance variables in this class. By adding Soaping functionality to the class, and with the help of getters, setters and wrappers provided by overload(), I can intercept all accesses to this instance, turn them into SOAP calls to some remote instance of that object, and marshall the results back into my application. The beauty of this is, that I can do this at run-time, and that I can do this generically with any old class, using two miniscule additions to the system, aggregate() and overload(). Yet for the user this is probably transparent. Class definition is defined at design time not run time! No, it isn't. Unless you are stuck with C++. PHP is for rapid prototyping. That may turn into rabid prototyping (SCNR the pun) if you do not know how to use it, but it may also be an extremely powerful tool as I have shown. Generally speaking, it allows you to design metaclasses and metasystems, which add some general function to the language itself. Kristian -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Stig S. Bakken wrote: Example set of classes using aggregate to customize at runtime: DB_Connection generic connection object DB_Connection_odbc layer interfacing to PHP's odbc functions DB_Connection_oracle ditto for Oracle DB_Connection_mysqlditto for MySQL DB_SQL_oracle SQL portability layer for Oracle DB_SQL_mysql ditto for MySQL If the user requests a connection to an Oracle database, the connect function returns an instance of DB_Connection that has aggregated DB_Connection_oracle and DB_SQL_oracle. But if the user requests a connection to Oracle through ODBC, the connect function returns an instance of DB_Connection that has aggregated DB_Connection_odbc. After connecting to the database, DB_Connection_odbc detects that it is used against Oracle and aggregates DB_SQL_oracle. You can do all this almost the same way you have shown using MI and a factory object. You would premix your classes to get a static (determined at compile time) mix, and have the factory return the appropriately mixed class. That's why I was using a generic RPC proxy and a Soaping mixin in my example. In my example the actual classes being mixed are not fixed, and are in fact not known until include_once() time (runtime). Aggegration allows you to mix functionality into existing classes dynamically, include_once() allows you to load code dynamically. Thus, any attempt to solve this at compiletime is doomed. Generally speaking it is about class and type. A type describes what an object can do, it's signature. The signature is a canonic serialization of all its instance variable names and function signatures. A class is where the object got these instance variables and functions from. In languages where class == type, functionality is either inherited or locally defined. But there are languages where functionality is not restricted to these sources but may be provided in other ways. Aggregation is one way to get functionality besides inheriance, and makes PHP a language where class != type, if desired. Traditionally, PHP always was class != type when it came to instance variables. $this-$b was a valid construct for any $b containing a valid variable name (and many invalid ones as well). Traditionally PHP also was limited in how it could aquire functions in objects, so it was class == type for functions of an object. Aggregate fixed that by providing the missing API. Stig's first attempt at aggregate() broke serialization and thus sessions, because serialze() assumes that is enough to note the class of an object in order to describe its type. That assumption had always been false, but there was no API to break it. For instance variables, serialize() always recorded the type, but for methods it recorded the class as a reasonable shortcut. In fact we could keep Stig's first version of aggregate(), if serialize() recorded the type of an object for its methods, too. It would have to write a log that describes how the object aquired its functionality in order to recreate that upon deserialization() (in PHPLIB terms, change $o = new Class; # aggregate($o, anotherClass); $o-slot = 17; so that the aggregate statement is recorded and generated in the session data) It is only because of the uglyness of this approach that Stig revised his implementation of aggregate() so that it does not break the (actually false) assumption of serialize() that class == type for methods. Kristian -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Kristian Köhntopp wrote: brad lafountain wrote: Unless someone could give me a real reason that aggerate is better than MI. Aggregation does at runtime what MI does at compile time. Delaying the decision to do something is usually an enable for specific applications. I agree. It would be useful some application. Brad, Having aggregate will affects MI support at script engine level? If it affects or may affect, we are better to make it a experimental at least. We don't have to limit ourself at this point, right? -- Yasuo Ohgaki Examples are the signal/slot mechanism based call-models in Gnome and Qt vs. virtual function tables in C++. The decision which implementation for a method is being called is delayed to the actual point in time when a call is being made, enabling a much more flexible component model and much better reuse. The cost for doing things late is worse typechecking, errors are potentially caught only at call-time, not at compile-time (with Qt, it probably is link-time, due to the way it is implemented). The same goes with aggregation. Aggregation allows me to write a class Soaping, which implements a SOAP RPC Client and a SOAPFactory class, which manufactures objects of any class and aggregates Soaping into them: I could include_once() any unknown class, create an instance and use PHPs introspective functions to create a list of functions and instance variables in this class. By adding Soaping functionality to the class, and with the help of getters, setters and wrappers provided by overload(), I can intercept all accesses to this instance, turn them into SOAP calls to some remote instance of that object, and marshall the results back into my application. The beauty of this is, that I can do this at run-time, and that I can do this generically with any old class, using two miniscule additions to the system, aggregate() and overload(). Yet for the user this is probably transparent. Class definition is defined at design time not run time! No, it isn't. Unless you are stuck with C++. PHP is for rapid prototyping. That may turn into rabid prototyping (SCNR the pun) if you do not know how to use it, but it may also be an extremely powerful tool as I have shown. Generally speaking, it allows you to design metaclasses and metasystems, which add some general function to the language itself. Kristian -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] classes, instances objects in ZE2
Marcus Börger wrote:
- we have private, what about final, public, protected and
abstract (can we remove/hide a method from an object)?
Do we in ZE2? What use it is?
In my book, private is only of very limited use, because there
always must be a way around it.
Introducing private (in C++) immediately called for the
introduction of protected and friend, with protected being a
mechanism to break privacy along the lines of the inheritance
hierarchy and friend being a mechanism to break privacy across
inheritance hierarchies, at compile time.
Since PHP does many things at run time which C++ does at compile
time, there must be a mechanism to break privacy at run time,
which makes it pretty pointless to have private variables in the
first place.
I'd rather go for a warning that is being triggered whenever I
access $a-_slot, but not when I access $this-_slot (Access to
private object member). I could suppress this warning by writing
$a-_slot as $a-_slot instead.
Providing stronger privacy would only force the addition of even
more syntactic candy (such as a get_private($o, $slot) and
set_private($o, $slot)). Functions to break privacy are needed
in order to write Metafunctionality such as a serialization
agent, or a RPC proxy like the Soaping mixin class I introduced
in another mail to this list.
- do we allow to reduce visability (replace protected by
private as long as we don't have it):
class A {
public function f()..
}
class B extends A {
protected function f()...
}
Same reasoning as above. Make it a warning, do not delve into BD
language realms. PHP does things at run time, because we are in
the rapid prototyping area and flexibility comes before compile
type checking and static bindings. And anyway, class != type in
PHP.
Kristian
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] declaring arrays.
Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:55:38 +0200 Vasoczki Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am new on this list, and i have no big experiences in php. Now i am writing a script, what is counting some records in 5 MySQL table. this is not the appropriate list for questions about development with PHP, but of PHP. Please ask such questions on [EMAIL PROTECTED] and please have a close to the Manual (http://php.net/array) Jan -- Q: Thank Jan? A: http://geschenke.an.dasmoped.net/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: stream notification handlers
Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:15:27 +0100 Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path [, resource context]]) context is only optional if you use use_include_path in this proto. Is that desired? Don't you mean proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path] [, resource context]) Jan -- Q: Thank Jan? A: http://geschenke.an.dasmoped.net/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] instance of mssql
It is possible to connect php server at secondary instance of mssql (mssql 2000) if you have the solution, please i would like sample please thanks -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] gmmktime fails because of bug! any solutions?
After some sleepless nights and a DB with messed-up GMT-Epoch-timestamps, I tried to figure out the problem with gmmktime and only then found that the bug persists since quite a while: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=14391 At this point you CANNOT RELY ON GMT-TIMESTAMPS created by gmmktime(). They fail on w2k with the switch from/to DST and are the respective hour off... See problem description and examples in the link above. Does anyone know workarounds for this? I can help by providing testcases or testing grounds if that is nessesary, but I propose that this should be fixed asap. The clock is ticking and the next moment where the php-epoch-stamps will go crazy again is Oct 26th, 2002 greets. -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: stream notification handlers
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:43:57PM +0200, Jan Lehnardt wrote : Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:15:27 +0100 Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path [, resource context]]) context is only optional if you use use_include_path in this proto. Is that desired? Don't you mean proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path] [, resource context]) An optional parameter following an optional parameter means to set the second optional parameter you _have_ to give the first parameter a value too hence in that context it's not optional anymore. So, writing stirng mode [, bool use_path [, resource ctx]] is correct (as long as PHP does not have a place holder to leave out consecutive optional parameters. - Markus -- Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists. GnuPG Key: http://guru.josefine.at/~mfischer/C2272BD0.asc Mind if I MFH ? What QA did you do on it? the usual? ah... none :) -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: stream notification handlers
Well, since you cant skip optional parameters, those protos are equivalent. :-) On 08/04/02, Jan Lehnardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:15:27 +0100 Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path [, resource context]]) context is only optional if you use use_include_path in this proto. Is that desired? Don't you mean proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path] [, resource context]) Jan -- Q: Thank Jan? A: http://geschenke.an.dasmoped.net/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: stream notification handlers
Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:22:59 +0100 Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, since you cant skip optional parameters, those protos are equivalent. my fault, sorry (also to Markus ;) Jan -- Q: Thank Jan? A: http://geschenke.an.dasmoped.net/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: stream notification handlers
Heh, not until some clever brain comes up with a place holder to leave out optional parameters (I remember some discussions about it in my dark half of my brain). - Markus ;) On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:22:59PM +0100, Wez Furlong wrote : Well, since you cant skip optional parameters, those protos are equivalent. :-) On 08/04/02, Jan Lehnardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:15:27 +0100 Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path [, resource context]]) context is only optional if you use use_include_path in this proto. Is that desired? Don't you mean proto resource fopen(string filename, string mode [, bool use_include_path] [, resource context]) Jan -- Q: Thank Jan? A: http://geschenke.an.dasmoped.net/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists. GnuPG Key: http://guru.josefine.at/~mfischer/C2272BD0.asc Mind if I MFH ? What QA did you do on it? the usual? ah... none :) -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 /pear Makefile.frag
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: yohgaki Mon Apr 8 10:17:31 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/pearMakefile.frag Log: Make pgsql header available for PECL module(s) It's better to have a way to install PECL module's header, so that we can make most modules into PECL. -- Yasuo Ohgaki -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] diff for 4.2.0RC2 to compile against Apache 2.0.35-dev
Here's a context diff of changes needed to compile against Apache 2.0.35-dev
(or newer I assume).
Billy Rose
*** php-4.2.0RC2/sapi/apache2filter/sapi_apache2.c Thu Mar 14 04:57:00
2002
--- ../php-4.2.0RC2/sapi/apache2filter/sapi_apache2.c Mon Apr 8 09:21:46
2002
***
*** 55,64
if (str_length == 0) return 0;
! bb = apr_brigade_create(ctx-f-r-pool);
while (str_length 0) {
now = MIN(str_length, 4096);
! b = apr_bucket_transient_create(str, now);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, b);
str += now;
str_length -= now;
--- 55,64
if (str_length == 0) return 0;
! bb = apr_brigade_create(ctx-f-r-pool,ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
while (str_length 0) {
now = MIN(str_length, 4096);
! b = apr_bucket_transient_create(str,
now,ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, b);
str += now;
str_length -= now;
***
*** 171,178
* all further flush buckets.
*/
! bb = apr_brigade_create(ctx-f-r-pool);
! b = apr_bucket_flush_create();
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, b);
if (ap_pass_brigade(ctx-f-next, bb) != APR_SUCCESS) {
php_handle_aborted_connection();
--- 171,178
* all further flush buckets.
*/
! bb = apr_brigade_create(ctx-f-r-pool,ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
! b = apr_bucket_flush_create(ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, b);
if (ap_pass_brigade(ctx-f-next, bb) != APR_SUCCESS) {
php_handle_aborted_connection();
***
*** 234,240
if (ctx == NULL) { \
/* Initialize filter context */ \
SG(server_context) = ctx = apr_pcalloc(f-r-pool,
sizeof(*ctx)); \
! ctx-bb = apr_brigade_create(f-c-pool); \
}
static int php_input_filter(ap_filter_t *f, apr_bucket_brigade *bb,
--- 234,240
if (ctx == NULL) { \
/* Initialize filter context */ \
SG(server_context) = ctx = apr_pcalloc(f-r-pool,
sizeof(*ctx)); \
! ctx-bb = apr_brigade_create(f-c-pool,f-c-bucket_alloc);
\
}
static int php_input_filter(ap_filter_t *f, apr_bucket_brigade *bb,
***
*** 383,389
#define PHP_NO_DATA The PHP Filter did not receive suitable input data
! eos =
apr_bucket_transient_create(PHP_NO_DATA, sizeof(PHP_NO_DATA)-1);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_HEAD(bb, eos);
}
}
--- 383,389
#define PHP_NO_DATA The PHP Filter did not receive suitable input data
! eos =
apr_bucket_transient_create(PHP_NO_DATA,
sizeof(PHP_NO_DATA)-1,ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_HEAD(bb, eos);
}
}
***
*** 392,398
SG(server_context) = 0;
/* Pass EOS bucket to next filter to signal end of request
*/
! eos = apr_bucket_eos_create();
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, eos);
return ap_pass_brigade(f-next, bb);
--- 392,398
SG(server_context) = 0;
/* Pass EOS bucket to next filter to signal end of request
*/
! eos = apr_bucket_eos_create(ctx-f-c-bucket_alloc);
APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(bb, eos);
return ap_pass_brigade(f-next, bb);
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Kristian Köhntopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: brad lafountain wrote: Unless someone could give me a real reason that aggerate is better than MI. Aggregation does at runtime what MI does at compile time. Delaying the decision to do something is usually an enable for specific applications. Examples are the signal/slot mechanism based call-models in Gnome and Qt vs. virtual function tables in C++. The decision which implementation for a method is being called is delayed to the actual point in time when a call is being made, enabling a much more flexible component model and much better reuse. Im not familure with this can you please explain. The cost for doing things late is worse typechecking, errors are potentially caught only at call-time, not at compile-time (with Qt, it probably is link-time, due to the way it is implemented). The same goes with aggregation. Aggregation allows me to write a class Soaping, which implements a SOAP RPC Client and a SOAPFactory class, which manufactures objects of any class and aggregates Soaping into them: I could include_once() any unknown class, create an instance and use PHPs introspective functions to create a list of functions and instance variables in this class. By adding Soaping functionality to the class, and with the help of getters, setters and wrappers provided by overload(), I can intercept all accesses to this instance, turn them into SOAP calls to some remote instance of that object, and marshall the results back into my application. The beauty of this is, that I can do this at run-time, and that I can do this generically with any old class, using two miniscule additions to the system, aggregate() and overload(). Yet for the user this is probably transparent. I have made this exact soap client and server as a php extension. It works fine without aggregation. Class definition is defined at design time not run time! No, it isn't. Unless you are stuck with C++. PHP is for rapid prototyping. That may turn into rabid prototyping (SCNR the pun) if you do not know how to use it, but it may also be an extremely powerful tool as I have shown. Generally speaking, it allows you to design metaclasses and metasystems, which add some general function to the language itself. I guess my biggest argument is that aggergration will cause some problems like serizliation and Im still not convinced that aggergration does any good when you are designing a class libary. Basically I don't want aggergation to be the only way that a user can have MI just because MI isn't implemented. I can see users doing this. class A; class B; class C; $c = new C; aggergate($c, A); aggergate($c, B); Just because they can. Not be cause it makes sence or its readable. I guess it would aleviate my conserns if MI was included as well as aggergation. - Brad __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] classes, instances objects in ZE2
At 15:36 08.04.2002, Kristian Köhntopp wrote:
Marcus Börger wrote:
- we have private, what about final, public, protected and
abstract (can we remove/hide a method from an object)?
Do we in ZE2? What use it is?
In my book, private is only of very limited use, because there
always must be a way around it.
So that book is your own meaning. I do more like accepted books on
computer language theory (for OO languages there is only one book:
A Theory on Objects; Martin Abadi, Luca Cardelli, Springer).
Introducing private (in C++) immediately called for the
introduction of protected and friend, with protected being a
mechanism to break privacy along the lines of the inheritance
hierarchy and friend being a mechanism to break privacy across
inheritance hierarchies, at compile time.
Yes it does call for it. But please do not use break.
A private method is a method that cannot be used for inheritance.
Thus you cannot implement it another way in a derived class/object.
A protected method is a method that can be used for inheritance but
is not accessible from other classes. A friend is a method/class that
is allowed to handle private/protected members of another class (here
breaking could be used).
Since PHP does many things at run time which C++ does at compile
time, there must be a mechanism to break privacy at run time,
which makes it pretty pointless to have private variables in the
first place.
Does not because inheritance does not necessary have to be implemented
at compile time. This can be handled using the same words at runtime, too.
The one reason for handling inheritance at compile time is that you can
easier achive type strictness at compile time (but like C++ we don't have
that).
I'd rather go for a warning that is being triggered whenever I
access $a-_slot, but not when I access $this-_slot (Access to
private object member). I could suppress this warning by writing
$a-_slot as $a-_slot instead.
We could do this by issuing an error instead of a warning (and we should)!
Providing stronger privacy would only force the addition of even
more syntactic candy (such as a get_private($o, $slot) and
set_private($o, $slot)). Functions to break privacy are needed
in order to write Metafunctionality such as a serialization
agent, or a RPC proxy like the Soaping mixin class I introduced
in another mail to this list.
As already mentioned above we could use friend or referring to the
other OO discussion going on we could use aggregation to achieve
this. So there is no need for get/Set_private().
- do we allow to reduce visability (replace protected by
private as long as we don't have it):
class A {
public function f()..
}
class B extends A {
protected function f()...
}
Same reasoning as above. Make it a warning, do not delve into BD
language realms. PHP does things at run time, because we are in
the rapid prototyping area and flexibility comes before compile
type checking and static bindings. And anyway, class != type in
PHP.
Rapid prototyping does not necessary need to have bad design. And
of cause when not using private/protected you can do dirty prototyping
just like without it - BUT you can do really good design. And i thought
we all would like PHP to become *the* solution for web applications.
Kristian
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:50, brad lafountain wrote: --- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:35, brad lafountain wrote: What would be wrong with having the *_SQL_* objects be a member of the *_Connection* classes? What you're describing here is object aggregation. What do you mean... Im saying that the SQL implementation is a member or the connection class.. Nothing to do with aggergation. aggergation would mean the methods of the sql imp would be apart of the connection class not a member. Im still not convinced that aggergation is usefull. Object aggregation in general is a technique where you have some functionality in objects you forward calls to, a pretty common technique. You can of course do that in PHP today, but it's slow (lots of userland method calls) and high on maintenance (if an aggregated class gets a new method, you must make a new wrapper in the forwarding class, etc). In my opinion, providing native support for this in an efficient way makes a lot of sense for PHP. Ok, Im still not convinced that I personally will ever use aggregation but im sure someone out there somewhere would want to use it. But my consern is that people will start using aggregation instead of normal MI. Aggregation should only be used at certin times not just for MI. (as i said in another post) Basically I don't want aggergation to be the only way that a user can have MI just because MI isn't implemented. I can see users doing this. class A; class B; class C; $c = new C; aggergate($c, A); aggergate($c, B); Just because they can. Not be cause it makes sence or its readable. I guess it would aleviate my conserns if MI was included as well as aggergation. (as i said in another post) - Brad __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 08:59:39AM -0700, brad lafountain wrote: class A; class B; class C; $c = new C; aggergate($c, A); aggergate($c, B); Just because they can. Yes of course, but how is this better than class D extends A, B, C; $d = new D; for the same reasons (i.e. because you can as opposed to it makes sense???) Kristian -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] classes, instances objects in ZE2
I agree with Kristian here; it is quite common to need to break
the protected/privacy rules when the class hierarchy is badly designed.
I'm referring to Delphi here where code like this is required because
someone didn't make something public when they should have.
It's a double issue: 1) is that the class is badly designed, 2) is
that this hack is even possible.
/* psuedo code */
class ImageList {
protected HImageList; /* should be public, or have a getter */
};
// In some other code that uses winapi and needs the handle
class ImageListHack {
public HImageList;
};
handle = ((ImageListHack)imlist)-HImageList;
On 09/04/02, Marcus Börger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 15:36 08.04.2002, Kristian Köhntopp wrote:
Introducing private (in C++) immediately called for the
introduction of protected and friend, with protected being a
mechanism to break privacy along the lines of the inheritance
hierarchy and friend being a mechanism to break privacy across
inheritance hierarchies, at compile time.
Yes it does call for it. But please do not use break.
A private method is a method that cannot be used for inheritance.
Thus you cannot implement it another way in a derived class/object.
A protected method is a method that can be used for inheritance but
is not accessible from other classes. A friend is a method/class that
is allowed to handle private/protected members of another class (here
breaking could be used).
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch
Hi folks, Attached please find a zip file containing both a diff and a modified php_odbc.c file that cleans up some problems with Connection in Use errors our customers (and others) were having with PHP. The patch was made against PHP 4.1.2 Can Dan et. al. check it over and commit please? Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server php-odbc-patch.zip Description: application/applefile php-odbc-patch.zip Description: Macintosh archive -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: aggregate() und overload()
__get_x() is simply a shortcut, I don't see how it can backfire on us in the overload framework. It is very helpful if you have a couple of variables that are more frequently accessed and you want to split up their processing from the rest. They are pretty much analogous to get/set property handlers in C#, except that those get converted to __prop_get/set() names by the compiler. If you are worried about its interaction with aggregate(), there is no problem. Aggregate() will not import methods that start with '_'. On Mon, 08 Apr 2002, Kristian Köhntopp wrote: As of now, this is just an unspecified bad feeling of mine. I only can back up this with the two times we had special names which were variable in PHP: Both attempts at them failed horribly: - We had (have, until ZE 2, if I am not mistaken) variable named constructors (ctors named after the class). These had a number of design flaws in PHP 3, which were fixed in PHP 4, at the cost of an overly complex ruleset for constructor names. Had we chosen stable names for constructors, we'd gotten the same effect with a single rule for ctor names. - We had (until very recently) variable names for imported variables amidst our global namespace. We earned a number of security problems due to admittedly stupid code, which swayed the PTBs to finally disable registering globals by default. I cannot come up with a bomb script right now, but I am reasonably sure that __get_x() will backfire at some time as well. Kristian -Andrei * On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key. * -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch
Hello Andrew, as I dont kno wfor sure when Dan will read his mail, I'll respond here. Can you please make a patch against the current CVS version, and provide it as either a .zip or .tar.gz format? apple files are not readable by me and most other people. regards, Derick On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Andrew Hill wrote: Hi folks, Attached please find a zip file containing both a diff and a modified php_odbc.c file that cleans up some problems with Connection in Use errors our customers (and others) were having with PHP. The patch was made against PHP 4.1.2 Can Dan et. al. check it over and commit please? Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server --- Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/registry/SLCB276UZU8B --- PHP: Scripting the Web - [EMAIL PROTECTED] All your branches are belong to me! SRM: Script Running Machine - www.vl-srm.net --- -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch
Hey Andrew, Dont mind any bad typing by me, I am not used to German keyboard layouts. Your patch .diff file does seem to do anything though except a whitespace change. Is that the proper diff file? Derick the message is a .zip btw. This message took 20 minutes to write... sorry for brevity. On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Andrew Hill wrote: Hi folks, Attached please find a zip file containing both a diff and a modified php_odbc.c file that cleans up some problems with Connection in Use errors our customers (and others) were having with PHP. The patch was made against PHP 4.1.2 Can Dan et. al. check it over and commit please? Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server --- Dan KalowskyThe record shows, I took the blows. http://www.deadmime.org/~dankAnd did it my way. [EMAIL PROTECTED]- My Way, Frank Sinatra -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Upload alert
Hi! I need a php script to alert me (with a pop up window or something like that) when a certain web page is modified. Is it possible? Where can I find that? Tks in advance, Rodolfo Silva -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Upload alert
You're asking on the wrong place (again). This list is for developing PHP, not for developing WITH PHP. Send support questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sander On 2002.04.08 19:07 Rodolfo Silva wrote: Hi! I need a php script to alert me (with a pop up window or something like that) when a certain web page is modified. Is it possible? Where can I find that? Tks in advance, Rodolfo Silva -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Kristian Koehntopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 08:59:39AM -0700, brad lafountain wrote: class A; class B; class C; $c = new C; aggergate($c, A); aggergate($c, B); Just because they can. Yes of course, but how is this better than class D extends A, B, C; $d = new D; for the same reasons (i.e. because you can as opposed to it makes sense???) Yeah now they can use D over and over agian with out having to aggregate it over and over again because it IS defineable at compile time. class circle; class square; class 3d_object; class 2d_object; class 3d_circle extends circle, 3d_object; class 2d_square extends square, 2d_object; class 3d_square extends square, 3d_object; $obj1 = new 3d_circle; $obj2 = new 2d_square; $obj3 = new 3d_square; that is way eaiser to read than.. class circle; class square; class 3d_object; class 2d_object; $obj1 = new circle; aggregate($obj1, 3d_object); $obj2 = new square; aggregate($obj2, 2d_object); $obj3 = new square; aggregate($obj3, 3d_object); Besides that you can re-use your 3d shapes over and over again. Im saying that aggregate can be used (not too often) but having aggregate and not MI would lead to the above code. Users using aggregate as an alternative to MI. When it makes sence to do the inheritance at compile time not run time. - Brad Kristian __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
in the copy_zend_constant function it reads:
void copy_zend_constant(zend_constant *c)
{
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
if (!(c-flags CONST_PERSISTENT)) {
zval_copy_ctor(c-value);
if (c-flags CONST_EFREE_PERSISTENT) { /* persist_alloc()'d data */
persist_alloc(c-value);
}
}
}
I draw your attention to the first line in the function:
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
First of all, why is this string duplicated only to store it to the same
location? Secondly, is c-name freed somewhere else? Cause I can't see it
being freed. Seems like this line can be removed...
Joseph
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in the copy_zend_constant function it reads:
void copy_zend_constant(zend_constant *c)
{
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
if (!(c-flags CONST_PERSISTENT)) {
zval_copy_ctor(c-value);
if (c-flags CONST_EFREE_PERSISTENT) { /* persist_alloc()'d data */
persist_alloc(c-value);
}
}
}
I draw your attention to the first line in the function:
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
First of all, why is this string duplicated only to store it to the same
location? Secondly, is c-name freed somewhere else? Cause I can't see it
being freed. Seems like this line can be removed...
So c points to the old value and you need to copy the name and the value to
the new one, name and value. and the way hashes and emalloc works the memory
will be freed automatically.
Joseph
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
I don't follow you. Why does it need to be copied? c-name already
contains the value. Old? New? c is c is c. Commenting out the code
causes other problems elsewhere (or seems to). I just don't understand why
it has to be done.
-Original Message-
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in the copy_zend_constant function it reads:
void copy_zend_constant(zend_constant *c)
{
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
if (!(c-flags CONST_PERSISTENT)) {
zval_copy_ctor(c-value);
if (c-flags CONST_EFREE_PERSISTENT) { /*
persist_alloc()'d data */
persist_alloc(c-value);
}
}
}
I draw your attention to the first line in the function:
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
First of all, why is this string duplicated only to store it to the same
location? Secondly, is c-name freed somewhere else? Cause I
can't see it
being freed. Seems like this line can be removed...
So c points to the old value and you need to copy the name and
the value to
the new one, name and value. and the way hashes and emalloc
works the memory
will be freed automatically.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
hmm
ok
zend_constant *c, *b;
char *sname = myname;
c-name = name; // the c-name is just a pointer to the sname
//c-name = strdup(sname); // c-name would have it's own memory
b = c; //now b-name points to sname
free(b-name); // would try and free b-name which can't be done, segfault!
so now you do this:
zend_constant *c, *b;
char *sname = myname;
c-name = strdup(sname); // c-name would have it's own memory
b = c; //now b-name points to a copy of sname
copy_zend_constant(b); //now b-name has its own memory
free(b-name); // now this will work no segfaults here
and if you look where copy_zend_constant it is only called when you want to
copy constants from one hash to another.
- Brad
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't follow you. Why does it need to be copied? c-name already
contains the value. Old? New? c is c is c. Commenting out the code
causes other problems elsewhere (or seems to). I just don't understand why
it has to be done.
-Original Message-
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in the copy_zend_constant function it reads:
void copy_zend_constant(zend_constant *c)
{
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
if (!(c-flags CONST_PERSISTENT)) {
zval_copy_ctor(c-value);
if (c-flags CONST_EFREE_PERSISTENT) { /*
persist_alloc()'d data */
persist_alloc(c-value);
}
}
}
I draw your attention to the first line in the function:
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
First of all, why is this string duplicated only to store it to the same
location? Secondly, is c-name freed somewhere else? Cause I
can't see it
being freed. Seems like this line can be removed...
So c points to the old value and you need to copy the name and
the value to
the new one, name and value. and the way hashes and emalloc
works the memory
will be freed automatically.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
Gotcha. Guess I missed that there was another copy somewhere. I'm trying
to track down a problem with ISAPI that causes php to die and take down
everything with it. Thought I might have a handle on it. Thanks for the
clarification.
Joseph
-Original Message-
From: brad lafountain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:25 PM
To: Joseph Tate; Php-Dev List
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak and possible cause of bug #15333
hmm
ok
zend_constant *c, *b;
char *sname = myname;
c-name = name; // the c-name is just a pointer to the sname
//c-name = strdup(sname); // c-name would have it's own memory
b = c; //now b-name points to sname
free(b-name); // would try and free b-name which can't be done,
segfault!
so now you do this:
zend_constant *c, *b;
char *sname = myname;
c-name = strdup(sname); // c-name would have it's own memory
b = c; //now b-name points to a copy of sname
copy_zend_constant(b); //now b-name has its own memory
free(b-name); // now this will work no segfaults here
and if you look where copy_zend_constant it is only called when
you want to
copy constants from one hash to another.
- Brad
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't follow you. Why does it need to be copied? c-name already
contains the value. Old? New? c is c is c. Commenting out the code
causes other problems elsewhere (or seems to). I just don't
understand why
it has to be done.
-Original Message-
--- Joseph Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in the copy_zend_constant function it reads:
void copy_zend_constant(zend_constant *c)
{
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
if (!(c-flags CONST_PERSISTENT)) {
zval_copy_ctor(c-value);
if (c-flags CONST_EFREE_PERSISTENT) { /*
persist_alloc()'d data */
persist_alloc(c-value);
}
}
}
I draw your attention to the first line in the function:
c-name = zend_strndup(c-name, c-name_len);
First of all, why is this string duplicated only to store
it to the same
location? Secondly, is c-name freed somewhere else? Cause I
can't see it
being freed. Seems like this line can be removed...
So c points to the old value and you need to copy the name and
the value to
the new one, name and value. and the way hashes and emalloc
works the memory
will be freed automatically.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch
Hi Dan, Yes, the .diff whitespace change is relevant, as preprocessor codes have to start in the first column. I've asked the iODBC maintainer (who produced this patch) to look at 4.2.0. And these weren't Mac files - should be fine on *nix platforms. Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server -Original Message- From: Dan Kalowsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 1:17 PM To: Andrew Hill Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch Hey Andrew, Dont mind any bad typing by me, I am not used to German keyboard layouts. Your patch .diff file does seem to do anything though except a whitespace change. Is that the proper diff file? Derick the message is a .zip btw. This message took 20 minutes to write... sorry for brevity. On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Andrew Hill wrote: Hi folks, Attached please find a zip file containing both a diff and a modified php_odbc.c file that cleans up some problems with Connection in Use errors our customers (and others) were having with PHP. The patch was made against PHP 4.1.2 Can Dan et. al. check it over and commit please? Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server --- Dan Kalowsky The record shows, I took the blows. http://www.deadmime.org/~dank And did it my way. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - My Way, Frank Sinatra -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Having both makes very little sense. Compile-time vs. run-time in PHP doesn't make any real difference as far as functionality goes, because the stages are linked together immediately. I don't think MI will make it into PHP, now that aggregation was introduced... At 18:59 08/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: --- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:50, brad lafountain wrote: --- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:35, brad lafountain wrote: What would be wrong with having the *_SQL_* objects be a member of the *_Connection* classes? What you're describing here is object aggregation. What do you mean... Im saying that the SQL implementation is a member or the connection class.. Nothing to do with aggergation. aggergation would mean the methods of the sql imp would be apart of the connection class not a member. Im still not convinced that aggergation is usefull. Object aggregation in general is a technique where you have some functionality in objects you forward calls to, a pretty common technique. You can of course do that in PHP today, but it's slow (lots of userland method calls) and high on maintenance (if an aggregated class gets a new method, you must make a new wrapper in the forwarding class, etc). In my opinion, providing native support for this in an efficient way makes a lot of sense for PHP. Ok, Im still not convinced that I personally will ever use aggregation but im sure someone out there somewhere would want to use it. But my consern is that people will start using aggregation instead of normal MI. Aggregation should only be used at certin times not just for MI. (as i said in another post) Basically I don't want aggergation to be the only way that a user can have MI just because MI isn't implemented. I can see users doing this. class A; class B; class C; $c = new C; aggergate($c, A); aggergate($c, B); Just because they can. Not be cause it makes sence or its readable. I guess it would aleviate my conserns if MI was included as well as aggergation. (as i said in another post) - Brad __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having both makes very little sense. Compile-time vs. run-time in PHP
doesn't make any real difference as far as functionality goes, because the
stages are linked together immediately.
I don't think MI will make it into PHP, now that aggregation was
introduced...
Yes it does make sence. How much slower would the code below run, not to
mention how hard it is to read or maintain.
class a;
class b;
class c;
for($i = 0;$i 1;$i++)
{
$d = new a;
aggregate($d, b);
aggregate($d, c);
$d-method();
}
or this
class a;
class b;
class c;
class d extends a,b,c;
for($i = 0;$i 1;$i++)
{
$d = new d;
$d-method();
}
Its all about desiging your objects.. if d always consits of a,b and c then MI
should be used. If some condition arises where d is only a and b or a and c.
then aggregation should be used.
Eg.
$d = new a;
if(condition)
aggregate($d, 'b');
elseif(codition)
aggregate($d, 'c');
$d-method();
That makes sence.
But not doign this.
$d = new a;
aggregate($d, 'b');
aggregate($d, 'c');
$d-method();
I currently am trying to talk my company to use php over java. This is a huge
project. The company i work for has 22000 employees and probally 500-1000
developers across us (mainly). And in desiging our classes i can see where i
could use MI. and im not about to go and tell all 500 developers that evertime
you create an instance of x you need to aggerate y.
If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI
too.
- brad
At 18:59 08/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote:
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:50, brad lafountain wrote:
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:35, brad lafountain wrote:
What would be wrong with having the *_SQL_* objects be a member
of the
*_Connection* classes?
What you're describing here is object aggregation.
What do you mean... Im saying that the SQL implementation is a member
or
the
connection class.. Nothing to do with aggergation. aggergation would
mean
the
methods of the sql imp would be apart of the connection class not a
member.
Im still not convinced that aggergation is usefull.
Object aggregation in general is a technique where you have some
functionality in objects you forward calls to, a pretty common
technique. You can of course do that in PHP today, but it's slow (lots
of userland method calls) and high on maintenance (if an aggregated
class gets a new method, you must make a new wrapper in the forwarding
class, etc). In my opinion, providing native support for this in an
efficient way makes a lot of sense for PHP.
Ok, Im still not convinced that I personally will ever use aggregation
but im
sure someone out there somewhere would want to use it. But my consern is
that
people will start using aggregation instead of normal MI. Aggregation should
only be used at certin times not just for MI.
(as i said in another post)
Basically I don't want aggergation to be the only way that a user can
have MI
just because MI isn't implemented. I can see users doing this.
class A;
class B;
class C;
$c = new C;
aggergate($c, A);
aggergate($c, B);
Just because they can. Not be cause it makes sence or its readable. I
guess
it would aleviate my conserns if MI was included as well as aggergation.
(as i said in another post)
- Brad
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Well i would have totally agreed with you yesterday.. but i have convinced myself that there is use for aggregation. Me personally i would never use it. But i can see somepeople using it. But giving the user a way to MI without having MI support(aggregation) will create alot of messy code. It wont even give the user a change to write good OO code. Can you explain why you can't see room for both of them? - Brad __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Steve Meyers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? That would be the biggest hack. MI isn't that hard to implement. It probally would take a good developer less than a weeks time to do. - Brad Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
At 00:55 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: Well i would have totally agreed with you yesterday.. but i have convinced myself that there is use for aggregation. Me personally i would never use it. But i can see somepeople using it. It doesn't mean it's a good idea to add it. I used both, and yes, aggregation makes sense in some cases, but having them both in the language is like a supermarket of everything, and that's never good. But giving the user a way to MI without having MI support(aggregation) will create alot of messy code. It wont even give the user a change to write good OO code. Can you explain why you can't see room for both of them? Aggregation is typically supported in userland, in the rare cases where it's really required (through wrapper methods that relay calls to a member object). Having them both will confuse people. Even people with some OO experience won't find it trivial to decide which they should use. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Mybe it would make sence to have MI for compile time and aggregation for run time. So we can have good design with MI and prototyping and testing and quick hacks with aggregeation. But doing compile times work with run time methods? marcus At 23:58 08.04.2002, you wrote: If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: cvs: php4 /pear Makefile.frag
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 16:45, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: yohgaki Mon Apr 8 10:17:31 2002 EDT Modified files: /php4/pear Makefile.frag Log: Make pgsql header available for PECL module(s) It's better to have a way to install PECL module's header, so that we can make most modules into PECL. Yes, I just added install headers to pear/TODO. - Stig -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
But a class is not defined at runtime, it's only compiled into bytecode that, when executed, declares the class. That's what Zeev means when he says that the difference between compile-time and runtime is not that big. IMHO there is room for both aggregate and MI. We have require and include, not just include? :-) - Stig On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:16, Marcus Börger wrote: Mybe it would make sence to have MI for compile time and aggregation for run time. So we can have good design with MI and prototyping and testing and quick hacks with aggregeation. But doing compile times work with run time methods? marcus At 23:58 08.04.2002, you wrote: If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 00:55 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote:
Well i would have totally agreed with you yesterday.. but i have convinced
myself that there is use for aggregation. Me personally i would never use
it.
But i can see somepeople using it.
It doesn't mean it's a good idea to add it. I used both, and yes,
aggregation makes sense in some cases, but having them both in the language
is like a supermarket of everything, and that's never good.
But giving the user a way to MI without having MI support(aggregation)
will
create alot of messy code. It wont even give the user a change to write
good OO
code.
Can you explain why you can't see room for both of them?
Aggregation is typically supported in userland, in the rare cases where
it's really required (through wrapper methods that relay calls to a member
object). Having them both will confuse people. Even people with some OO
experience won't find it trivial to decide which they should use.
But do you see my point that having ONLY aggregate means that in 90% of the
case where people will use it its probally a bad idea. They are only using it
becuase of the lack of MI. How does aggregation solve overwriting methods.
class a
{
function blah()
{
echo in a;
}
}
class b
{
function blah()
{
echo in b;
}
}
class c
{
function blah()
{
echo in c;
}
}
class d extends a,b,c
{
function blah()
{
echo a::blah() . b::blah() . c::blah();
}
}
how do you do that with aggregation? MI really is way different than
aggregation.
I see aggregation used for adding methods to an existing class.
class a
{
function do_a()
{
}
}
class b
{
function do_b()
{
}
}
$c = new stdclass;
aggregate($c, a);
aggregate($c, b);
$c-do_a();
$c-do_b();
but i still don't like this... there are cleaner ways around that by using
members and/or MI.
- Brad
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But a class is not defined at runtime, it's only compiled into bytecode that, when executed, declares the class. That's what Zeev means when he says that the difference between compile-time and runtime is not that big. IMHO there is room for both aggregate and MI. We have require and include, not just include? :-) Ok now we are talking :)... I think if aggregate exists then MI is absoulty necessary. but if MI exists then aggregate doesn't necessarly need to exists. - Stig On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:16, Marcus Börger wrote: Mybe it would make sence to have MI for compile time and aggregation for run time. So we can have good design with MI and prototyping and testing and quick hacks with aggregeation. But doing compile times work with run time methods? marcus At 23:58 08.04.2002, you wrote: If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch
Patch committed. Also into PHP_4_2_0 branch. --Jani On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Andrew Hill wrote: Hi Dan, Yes, the .diff whitespace change is relevant, as preprocessor codes have to start in the first column. I've asked the iODBC maintainer (who produced this patch) to look at 4.2.0. And these weren't Mac files - should be fine on *nix platforms. Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server -Original Message- From: Dan Kalowsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 1:17 PM To: Andrew Hill Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] php_odbc.c patch Hey Andrew, Dont mind any bad typing by me, I am not used to German keyboard layouts. Your patch .diff file does seem to do anything though except a whitespace change. Is that the proper diff file? Derick the message is a .zip btw. This message took 20 minutes to write... sorry for brevity. On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Andrew Hill wrote: Hi folks, Attached please find a zip file containing both a diff and a modified php_odbc.c file that cleans up some problems with Connection in Use errors our customers (and others) were having with PHP. The patch was made against PHP 4.1.2 Can Dan et. al. check it over and commit please? Best regards, Andrew Hill Director of Technology Evangelism OpenLink Software http://www.openlinksw.com Universal Data Access Virtuoso Universal Server --- Dan Kalowsky The record shows, I took the blows. http://www.deadmime.org/~dank And did it my way. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - My Way, Frank Sinatra -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Assistance Needed (not sure where to ask)
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a better place to ask this question. Cc'ing there. - Stig On Fri, 2002-03-15 at 00:55, Ozz Nixon wrote: Hello, We are developing a web server (for the past 5 years off and on), and the latest version supports ISAPI, and now PHP. I have everything working wonderfully - but have a problem, and not sure where/who to ask. When a PHP script does: setcookie($cookiename,$sessid,'',$cookiepath,$cookiedomain,$cookiesecure); or header(location: $ref); It appears my server code is not implementing something correclty. Would you mind giving me some insight on what exactly I might be missing? We are very interested in promoting PHP with our web server, and have already helped some customers move from IIS ASP to our webserver w/ PHP. I have developed all of their PHP using session variables. But I have had a couple customers say the above code is not working from well known PHP scripts (like phpBB and NukePHP), so I am sure it is not their issue it has to be mine. Basically in a simple test script, tracing my server code during exection I never see an ISAPI event for those - which leads me to think, I am not interacting with your ISAPI PHP correctly. I have written some test ISAPI's and they are working flawlessly, so I must not be calling your code correctly. Who can help me? As I am extremely excited to announce that our latest version is 100% compliant w/ ISAPI and can host PHP based sites. (I have successfully implemented almost every PHP example using every extension, but these two commands have me baffled on what did I not do correctly). Thanks greatly for your assistance!! Ozz Nixon www.bpdx.com -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
At 00:40 09.04.2002, Stig S. Bakken wrote: But a class is not defined at runtime, it's only compiled into bytecode that, when executed, declares the class. That's what Zeev means when he says that the difference between compile-time and runtime is not that big. What i meant with runtime was that aggregation allows to change the methods of an object. IMHO there is room for both aggregate and MI. We have require and include, not just include? :-) - Stig On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:16, Marcus Börger wrote: Mybe it would make sence to have MI for compile time and aggregation for run time. So we can have good design with MI and prototyping and testing and quick hacks with aggregeation. But doing compile times work with run time methods? marcus At 23:58 08.04.2002, you wrote: If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using aggregation? Zeev Suraski wrote: At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote: If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to include MI too. In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in PHP. Having both is messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging aggregation as experimental. Zeev -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
At 00:53 09.04.2002, you wrote:
--- Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But a class is not defined at runtime, it's only compiled into bytecode
that, when executed, declares the class. That's what Zeev means when he
says that the difference between compile-time and runtime is not that
big.
IMHO there is room for both aggregate and MI. We have require and
include, not just include? :-)
Ok now we are talking :)...
I think if aggregate exists then MI is absoulty necessary. but if MI exists
then aggregate doesn't necessarly need to exists.
Sure! And keep in mind that when only having MI we only have objects because
we allow or instances to have dynamically added members.
class A {
}
$a = new A;
$a-b = 'new'; // WORKS!
When having aggregation we also have objects because of changing method
tables, too. Then why am i not allowed to do the following:
class A {
}
function add($name, $value) {
$this-$name = $value; // WORKS!
}
$a = new A;
$a-add = add;// NOT Allowed
$a-add('b', 'new');
This is not possible now BUT this is object oriented code and not only class
oriented! And we did not use Aggregation. Aggregation is only a technique
to add complete method tables from one class to an object (run-time) whereas
MI adds complete method tables from one class to another class. Therefore
aggregation is only a specialcase of the above scenario.
If the discussion did only came up because someone wanted to have streaming
there are three ways out of it:
1) MI
2) aggregation
3) properties and a superclass that has a stream interface with properties
(like
Borland's CBuilder).
4) Interfaces
Option 3 has the negative effect that only classes derived from the defined
superclass
can be streamed. Option 1 allows to add streaming support for any class at
compile
time whereas aggregation would allow to add streaming at run time to
instances which
were never considered to be streamed. Again the 4th option allows to do all
without
MI or aggregation (that does not mean i dislike MI/aggregation - i like
MI+Interfaces).
In a mail some hours ago brad already unfolded the main difference:
With aggregation you can have d=(a,b) and d=(a,c) while MI only allows
d=(a,b,c).
marcus
- Stig
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:16, Marcus Börger wrote:
Mybe it would make sence to have MI for compile time and aggregation
for run time. So we can have good design with MI and prototyping and
testing and quick hacks with aggregeation. But doing compile times work
with run time methods?
marcus
At 23:58 08.04.2002, you wrote:
If MI can be emulated using aggregation, how hard would it be to add the
syntax for MI to the language, but have it implement it using
aggregation?
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 00:44 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote:
If aggregation is included then i see it is absoulty necessary to
include
MI too.
In my opinion, only one of them (at most) has room in
PHP. Having both
is
messy. My personal preference is MI, which is why I prefer tagging
aggregation as experimental.
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Brad Lafountain wrote:
*SNIP*
But do you see my point that having ONLY aggregate means that in 90% of the
case where people will use it its probally a bad idea. They are only using it
becuase of the lack of MI. How does aggregation solve overwriting methods.
class a
{
function blah()
{
echo in a;
}
}
class b
{
function blah()
{
echo in b;
}
}
class c
{
function blah()
{
echo in c;
}
}
class d extends a,b,c
{
function blah()
{
echo a::blah() . b::blah() . c::blah();
}
}
With MI, documentation can be generated easily using tools.
*EASIER* to maintain code.
how do you do that with aggregation? MI really is way different than
aggregation.
I see aggregation used for adding methods to an existing class.
class a
{
function do_a()
{
}
}
class b
{
function do_b()
{
}
}
$c = new stdclass;
aggregate($c, a);
aggregate($c, b);
$c-do_a();
$c-do_b();
With aggregate, auto generating documentation hard.
*HARDER* (very hard, if one use it w/o good reason) to maintain code
To me, aggregate is GOTO like feature.
It's useful for sure, Howver
_Never_ use unless there is very good reason.
Therefore, it worth to have both MI and aggregate. IMHO
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
but i still don't like this... there are cleaner ways around that by using
members and/or MI.
- Brad
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Aggregation, Multiple Inheritence, pros/cons
Hello all,
check this Thesis about multiple inheritence and aggregation, especially
chapter 9. It gives an excellent source for debate, and will explain the
main differences between both techniques, the pros, cons, etc..
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~pets/pruuden97.pdf
My vote is java like: no MI, no aggregation, single inheritence and use of
interfaces :)
- Original Message -
From: Yasuo Ohgaki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Brad Lafountain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
Brad Lafountain wrote:
*SNIP*
But do you see my point that having ONLY aggregate means that in 90% of
the
case where people will use it its probally a bad idea. They are only
using it
becuase of the lack of MI. How does aggregation solve overwriting
methods.
class a
{
function blah()
{
echo in a;
}
}
class b
{
function blah()
{
echo in b;
}
}
class c
{
function blah()
{
echo in c;
}
}
class d extends a,b,c
{
function blah()
{
echo a::blah() . b::blah() . c::blah();
}
}
With MI, documentation can be generated easily using tools.
*EASIER* to maintain code.
how do you do that with aggregation? MI really is way different than
aggregation.
I see aggregation used for adding methods to an existing class.
class a
{
function do_a()
{
}
}
class b
{
function do_b()
{
}
}
$c = new stdclass;
aggregate($c, a);
aggregate($c, b);
$c-do_a();
$c-do_b();
With aggregate, auto generating documentation hard.
*HARDER* (very hard, if one use it w/o good reason) to maintain code
To me, aggregate is GOTO like feature.
It's useful for sure, Howver
_Never_ use unless there is very good reason.
Therefore, it worth to have both MI and aggregate. IMHO
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
but i still don't like this... there are cleaner ways around that by
using
members and/or MI.
- Brad
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Assistance Needed (not sure where to ask)
Thanks Stig, Since that original post, we have successfully modified our WebServer software to run PHP 4.0 through 4.1.1 without error. The problem was the PHP ISAPI changed over time to use the _EX command for the header, and we had to update our internal code to support newer ISAPI specifications. Now, we are seriously testing every PHP script we can get our hands on, 1 to learn the scripting language, and 2 to make sure when we release WWS v1.1 we know it works with every script we can test again - and we document any modified we had to do (so far, VERY little has required changes - usually things, like assumption the script will run on a linux server, as our WWS code is available for both Windows and Linux). Thanks again! Ozz Nixon CEO Brain Patchwork DX, LLC. (p.s. who would I talk to about getting our server code PHP Certified?) - Original Message - From: Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ozz Nixon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 7:16 PM Subject: Re: Assistance Needed (not sure where to ask) Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a better place to ask this question. Cc'ing there. - Stig On Fri, 2002-03-15 at 00:55, Ozz Nixon wrote: Hello, We are developing a web server (for the past 5 years off and on), and the latest version supports ISAPI, and now PHP. I have everything working wonderfully - but have a problem, and not sure where/who to ask. When a PHP script does: setcookie($cookiename,$sessid,'',$cookiepath,$cookiedomain,$cookiesecure); or header(location: $ref); It appears my server code is not implementing something correclty. Would you mind giving me some insight on what exactly I might be missing? We are very interested in promoting PHP with our web server, and have already helped some customers move from IIS ASP to our webserver w/ PHP. I have developed all of their PHP using session variables. But I have had a couple customers say the above code is not working from well known PHP scripts (like phpBB and NukePHP), so I am sure it is not their issue it has to be mine. Basically in a simple test script, tracing my server code during exection I never see an ISAPI event for those - which leads me to think, I am not interacting with your ISAPI PHP correctly. I have written some test ISAPI's and they are working flawlessly, so I must not be calling your code correctly. Who can help me? As I am extremely excited to announce that our latest version is 100% compliant w/ ISAPI and can host PHP based sites. (I have successfully implemented almost every PHP example using every extension, but these two commands have me baffled on what did I not do correctly). Thanks greatly for your assistance!! Ozz Nixon www.bpdx.com -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Crash in Apache2Filter
Sebastian Bergmann wrote: Win32, Apache 2.0.36-dev, PHP 4.3.0-dev (both current CVS) The crash seems to be gone now. However, the following compiler warnings remain: c:\Apache2\include\apr.h(334): warning C4142: benign redefinition of type c:\home\php\php4\sapi\apache2filter\sapi_apache2.c(121): warning C4018: '': signed/unsigned mismatch c:\Apache2\include\apr.h(334): warning C4142: benign redefinition of type c:\home\php\php4\sapi\apache2filter\php_functions.c(91): warning C4244: 'function': conversion from 'apr_time_t' to 'long', possible loss of data c:\home\php\php4\sapi\apache2filter\php_functions.c(92): warning C4244: 'function': conversion from 'apr_off_t' to 'long', possible loss of data -- Sebastian Bergmann http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/ Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/ -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: aggergate vs MI
At 01:51 09/04/2002, brad lafountain wrote:
But do you see my point that having ONLY aggregate means that in 90% of the
case where people will use it its probally a bad idea. They are only using it
becuase of the lack of MI. How does aggregation solve overwriting methods.
Yes, I see the point...
but i still don't like this... there are cleaner ways around that by using
members and/or MI.
I really don't know - as far as I know, aggregation is really not about
runtime, but about 'has a', vs. 'is a'. When you have 'hard' compiling,
i.e., a phase that turns source code into a binary component, aggregation
helps keep a loose relationship between objects, but it's still done in
compile time of the new, 'derived' or constructed class:
class aggregated_class {
var $inner_object;
function aggergated_class()
{
$this-inner_object = new inner_class();
}
function inner_method()
{
return $this-inner_object-inner_method();
}
}
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] CVS Account Request: devuser
learn -- PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/ To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
