I'm sure many, if not all of you have seen this already.
http://xkcd.com/1172/
It sounds awfully familiar to PHP Internal's attitude toward BC
considerations for bug fixes, and perhaps offers some (albeit humorous)
insight into why some things just need to be fixed.
On 10/10/12 10:46 PM, Jazzer Dane wrote:
If at all possible, I'd rather not add extra keywords such as read-only and
write-only to the language. If it's unnecessary than it shouldn't be done -
that's my point of view. The question is thus is read-only necessary?.
The proposal brought up by
On 10/8/12 1:07 PM, Denis Portnov wrote:
08.10.2012 15:52, Clint Priest пишет:
public $Hours {
get { return $this-Seconds / 3600; }
set { $this-Seconds = $value; }
issethttp://www.php.net/isset { return
issethttp://www.php.net/isset($this-Seconds); }
.
Thanks,
Aaron Holmes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 8/14/12 10:36 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
That said, rewind() should behave consistently. I don't feel it makes
sense to have rewind() succeed at one point, and fail at another. It
would only cause confusion when not familiar with the behavior. Either
allow it, or don't. Not both.
It
For what my .02 is worth, I imagine plucking an item out of an array
would not occur to a user-land developer as the proper nomenclature for
extracting all the values from an array with the given key. At worst,
this means many developers simply won't learn about the function and
continue to
The name makes sense, but would likely be confused with extract()
http://us3.php.net/extract
On 6/25/2012 5:35 PM, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
What about array_extract ?
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Aaron Holmes aa...@aaronholmes.net
mailto:aa...@aaronholmes.net wrote:
For what my .02
