On Thursday 26 June 2008 11:23:53 am Christian Seiler wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> > I'm fine if you'll improve my patch (It's mainly yours :)
>
> I updated my closures RFC: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures
> In my eyes, the following questions should be answered:
>
> * Do you want closures in PHP?
>
Hey Christian,
Nice job!
More below:
> -Original Message-
> From: Christian Seiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 9:24 AM
> To: Dmitry Stogov
> Cc: php-dev List; Andi Gutmans; Stas Malyshev
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] [RFC] Closures and lambda functions i
Pierre Joye wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Scott MacVicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pierre Joye wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Pierre Joye wrote:
While working on the windows ports, I asked Sara about the mhash
Hi!
I see exactly one problem with the patch, which is that the above script
shouldn't work without "use (&$i)".
I find it counterintuitive that the creation of the lambda creates a copy of
$i, but all invocations of $lambda use a reference to the same $i.
For n calls to $lambda, there are only
Hi Marcus,
I like the new ability to reference if wanted. But then I don't like
references at all.
As I said: Without reference support, you can't call it closures.
Closures must per definition have the possibility to change the values
of used variables in the parent scope - and the only sensi
> * I added tests (Zend/tests/closures_*.phpt) that ensure the correct
> behaviour of closures.
I'd like to propose an additional test to ensure closures can all themselves:
Expected output:
3
2
1
3
I see exactly one problem with the patch, which is that the above script
shouldn't work wi
Hello Sebastian,
ok, even though I just wrote differently. It appears to me, after reading
the rest of the thread, that I shouuld maybe give in and favor a 5.4
instead.
marcus
Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 10:42:50 AM, you wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>> I am very sure we will see a 5.4. The
Hello Christian,
Thursday, June 26, 2008, 6:23:53 PM, you wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>> I'm fine if you'll improve my patch (It's mainly yours :)
> I updated my closures RFC: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures
> I have based my new version of the patch on yours (Dmitry), but I made
> some changes to th
No confusion. Clearly defined. No collision.
... except possibly between the eyes...
We had this discussion ad infinitum in the past. Please, not again?
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
2008/6/26 Stefan Priebsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hey all,
>
> honestly, it is not my intention to raise a new flamewar, but aren't most
> of these ambiguity problems we talk about due to the fact that :: is used as
> the namespace separator?
>
> Regards,
>
> Stefan
>
I think so. Considering this
Hi!
2. What does streams has to do with this networking? Can it be done using
streams?
Yes, it can. Take the following simple, incomplete example without much
error handling as a starting point:
// in the header
#include "php_streams.h"
// PHP function:
PHP_FUNCTION(simplehttp_fetch)
{
php
I would agree, they seem to cause more problems and pollution than it would
solve.
I like the idea behind namespaces but what I've seen of the current
implementations I would rather do without.
Unfortunately I don't have any ideas or solutions to the problems.
/James Dempster
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008
Hey all,
honestly, it is not my intention to raise a new flamewar, but aren't
most of these ambiguity problems we talk about due to the fact that ::
is used as the namespace separator?
Regards,
Stefan
--
>e-novative> - We make IT work for you.
e-novative GmbH - HR: Amtsgericht München HR
Hi Dmitry,
I'm fine if you'll improve my patch (It's mainly yours :)
I updated my closures RFC: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures
I have based my new version of the patch on yours (Dmitry), but I made
some changes to that:
* Objects instead of resources are used, two new files
zend_closur
How bad would it be to say that namespacing can only apply to classes and
not normal functions?
Lame, very lame. It would make them unusable for many distributed
projects that are not 100% OOP. Wordpress comes to mind. My own Phorum
as well.
I agree, namespaces need to work for all defi
How bad would it be to say that namespacing can only apply to classes and
not normal functions?
Lame, very lame. It would make them unusable for many distributed
projects that are not 100% OOP. Wordpress comes to mind. My own Phorum
as well.
It was my understanding that one of the primar
>>
>> The attached patch may also help both core and PECL extensions, emiting a
>> deprecation compile warning when those functions are used.
A bit late to answer but very good idea :)
--
Slan,
David
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.
2008/6/26 Hartmut Holzgraefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Richard Quadling wrote:
>
> How bad would it be to say that namespacing can only apply to classes and
>> not normal functions?
>>
>
> i don't see namespacing as an OO only feature, IMHO it is a perfectly
> valid and useful thing for pure procedu
Richard Quadling wrote:
How bad would it be to say that namespacing can only apply to classes and
not normal functions?
i don't see namespacing as an OO only feature, IMHO it is a perfectly
valid and useful thing for pure procedural code, too
not having namespacing for procedural functions wo
2008/6/26 Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> > Derick Rethans wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
> > >
> > > > it won't be a serious 'wtf', as on the top of the file, there
> > > > would be some kind of use MySuperLibrary::D
Mangol Smith escribió:
Hey guys,
someone suggested me to have a look at libcURL. I did, but its very complex.
All I needed is lowlevel/network wrappers.
like emalloc() & pemalloc() as wrapper on malloc(). There might be some
wrappers (platform independent & used in php source code) which I can
Hi
We have a problem with the (ODBC) persistent database connection. We
have found that every PHP-session, using the same dsn, user and
password, are getting the same persistent connection by a reasonable
chance.
Also meaning that if a database transaction was not finished, other
PHP-session can d
> Are you sure you even need to write your own extension? If you just want to
> do
> HTTP requests, then curl or HTTP extension should be sufficient.
Nope, I'm developing an extension. In which I require this functionality.
Its not the entire purpose of my extension. Just a part of the
functional
W liście Mangol Smith z dnia czwartek 26 czerwca 2008:
> But, doesn't this make my extension depend on Curl or any PEAR extension
> you are talking about? That is what I wan't to avoid.
>
Are you sure you even need to write your own extension? If you just want to do
HTTP requests, then curl or H
On Jun 26, 2008, at 4:06 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Now, upon execution of the code containing the closure, the new
opcode
just copies the zend_function structure into a copy, registers that
copy
as a resource and returns that resource. As soon as the resource is
garbage collected (or expli
On 18.06.2008, at 14:17, Christian Seiler wrote:
Now, upon execution of the code containing the closure, the new opcode
just copies the zend_function structure into a copy, registers that
copy
as a resource and returns that resource. As soon as the resource is
garbage collected (or explicitl
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
> >
> > > it won't be a serious 'wtf', as on the top of the file, there
> > > would be some kind of use MySuperLibrary::DateTime;
> >
> > I know, but 400 lines down in the code y
27 matches
Mail list logo
