On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 08/26/2012 06:18 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
Short of killing ourselves rewriting it in C++, I'm not sure there
is an ideal solution to this problem.
Because you think more people can grok C++ than C? That's not my
Hey guys,
I'm not sure whom to ask, but could somebody with the appropriate privs add
a Quick Fix to the Bugs dropdown that says something along the lines of,
Support for this PHP version has been discontinued (won't fix)? There's
currently a similar one already but it's specific to PHP 4, and
It's also worth noting that a billion iterations is a lot in any language,
not just PHP. Plus most browsers would probably blow-up in your face if
you tried to send that much data.
--Kris
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Raymond Irving xwis...@gmail.com wrote:
Many thanks for the feedback.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.comwrote:
Stan,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Stan Vass sv_for...@fmethod.com wrote:
Hi!
I agree with you. The one case where this syntax may be very useful is
if
we want to implement class casting. So introduce a
Btw, deleting all values (not just the first) is also very easy currently:
foreach (array_keys($array, $delValue) as $key) {
unset($array[$key]);
}
Even easier still, just do this:
$array_var = array();
--Kris
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Btw, deleting all values (not just the first) is also very easy
currently:
foreach (array_keys($array, $delValue) as $key) {
unset
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Btw, deleting all values (not just the first) is also very easy
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Stan Vass sv_for...@fmethod.com wrote:
I've felt the need for this for some time.
Proposed syntax:
-
$x = (InterfaceName) $container-service;
Proposed behavior:
---
Checks if the instance if an instance
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Yahav Gindi Bar g.b.ya...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
I believe its a newbie question, but because I only replied to mails and
didn't create any RFC page yet I wish to confirm.
I wish to create an RFC page for a feature discussion, but I can't do it
from the wiki
Put that aside, I think that someone should create a guidelines in the
wiki about how to post an RFC without an account...
Ironically, I think we'd need to create an RFC for that. ;)
--Kris
What do you think?
I think I need to get my lens prescription updated. I thought the subject
line read, Add *rootkit *to PHP Runtime and was already sharpening my
pitchfork before I realized my error.
For the record, I am firmly opposed to adding a rootkit to the PHP runtime.
A runkit
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Stas Malyshev wrote:
Helping to solve the problem would also help everybody else upgrade TO
PHP5.4?
OK, so what help do you require?
PEAR and PECL that work with PHP5.4 out of the box?
At least the core of PEAR that
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:13 AM, hakre hanskren...@yahoo.de wrote:
I have some simple questions about PHP 5.x End Of Life (EOL) dates:
PHP 5.0 - Is there some official news-item or changelog entry on php.netthat
says at which date PHP 5.0 went End Of Life?
PHP 5.2 - Does the End Of Support
Hey guys,
Sorry for the delayed report. They never responded to my last follow-up
email a couple weeks ago and I kinda forgot about it until now.
Fortunately, I checked the website and it looks like they do have us listed
finally. Here's the URL: http://internetdefenseleague.org/
Please
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Ángel González keis...@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/08/12 20:02, Kris Craig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:13 AM, hakre hanskren...@yahoo.de wrote:
I have some simple questions about PHP 5.x End Of Life (EOL) dates:
PHP 5.0 - Is there some official news-item
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 08/01/2012 11:16 AM, Ángel González wrote:
There should be a page like http://www.php.net/ancient-versions listing
the
versions with the date they went EOL and how much time has passed since
them.
Some scary
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Andrew Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 26/07/12 18:46, Levi Morrison wrote:
I'm in favor of an RFC app on the condition it has a nice UX and has
complete unit tests.
Welp, guess it's time for me to learn how to unit-test properly.
--
Andrew Faulds
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Andrew Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 26/07/12 16:44, Laupretre François wrote:
There was a time when one could have written an app for it in PHP ;)
Right. We all know from the beginning that a wiki is better than nothing
but, when the number of
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Andrew Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
Hi there,
First off I'd like to apologise for being a generally useless and overly
reactive poster on this list. I'm going to exercise more self-constraint
now after noticing I made more posts on this list this month than
1.01 eq 1.1
Could you explain this one to me? In every versioning system I've ever
used, 1.1 would be greater than 1.01, not equal.
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
Hi!
For example, I was not the only one who found it odd that 1.0 is
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Andrew Faulds ajf...@googlemail.comwrote:
If you think 1.1 =/= 1.01 you're sure using some weird version numbers.
Only 1.0.1 would be smaller.
Has anyone seen these weird version ordering schemes in practise? On any
major projects of note?
*raises his hand*
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Lonny Kapelushnik lon...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I found a problem in the PHP WIki. On IRC it was suggested that I open a
bug report (#62611) and email internals.
https://wiki.php.net/vcs/gitworkflow has wrong directions for 'Workflow
for
external
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Andrew Faulds ajf...@googlemail.comwrote:
Our syntax is very, very confusing for newbies. Also, procedural and OOP
programming is unnatural and unintuitive. We should use the natural LISP
braces syntax and make PHP functional, so it is much easier to write,
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Ronald Chmara rona...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
I get that the first two acronyms are POOP and SHIT; however, the third
one,
HARAH, is throwing me off. Is that a fecal reference in some other
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Andrew Faulds ajf...@googlemail.comwrote:
To avoid BC breaks we should try to avoid major syntax changes.
Again, why should we be worrying so much about BC breaks on a major version
increment? BC breakage is just a fact of life whenever a major version of
I don't understand why on earth your are mailing the PHP *internal
developer mailinglist* with this matter?
If you have any improvement suggestions for the documentations:
https://edit.php.net
-Hannes
I've seen the docs discussed on this list plenty of times. We do maintain
those as
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why on earth your are mailing the PHP *internal
developer mailinglist* with this matter?
If you have any
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Andrew Faulds ajf...@googlemail.comwrote:
Kris, I'd love to break BC a lot and fix things, but it would seriously
slow adoption. Fixing *bugs* has stopped people upgrading, imagine how they
would react to non-bugs being changed.
I agree with your point. I
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Laruence larue...@php.net wrote:
Hi:
I saw you two vote against for this RFC.
could you explain why? then maybe I can improve it.
thanks
I can't speak for them, but it might have something to do with a lack of
information. I don't recall seeing
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Dan Cryer d...@dancryer.com wrote:
The problem, of course, is changing and removing things can break BC. I'd
love to remove list() too, but that would break code relying on it.
Isn't that kind of the point of the whole discussion? This is talking about
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Dan Cryer d...@dancryer.com wrote:
The problem, of course, is changing and removing things can break BC.
I'd
love to remove list() too, but that would break code relying
I just noticed something that I hadn't really thought about before. I
couldn't remember the name of the function for parsing INI files so I did a
quick search. It took me straight to the page for php.ini directives. I
had to select online documentation from the dropdown and try again, this
time
4. Rewrite the entire parser completely. I keep hearing about how bad PHP's
parser is, and how it's growing out of control. Perhaps this is a good time
to rewrite it (perhaps changing semantics slightly) to be better adapted
towards future changes...
I'm bored so I'm gonna poke the
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
Hi internals!
Recent incidents have shown that even very large websites still don't
get how to do password hashing properly. The sha1 hashes used by
Linkedin et al can be easily cracked even by amateurs without
Wow, somebody has an odd sense of humor lol. Whoever you are, enjoy your
new book!
In case anyone was wondering, here's the Amazon description for this book:
Daughter of a cold, controlling mother and an anonymous donor, studious,
obedient Elizabeth finally let loose one night, drinking too
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Some observations and questions:
In the RFC, the top example claims to make use of the file() function,
but
in fact does not. Did you
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 4:29 AM, Felipe Pena felipe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
2012/6/6 Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com:
hi,
Pull it but I would still do a RFC to clearly document it (exact
behaviors), which could be then used by the doc team and to implement
tests.
On Wed, Jun 6,
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
Hi internals!
In the last few days I've created a proof of concept implementation
for generators in PHP. It's not yet complete, but the basic
functionality is there:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM, William Betts william.be...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Mathias Grimm mathiasgr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Named parameter in the same way that goto does, with labels. A labeled
parameter...
But there always some drawbacks... such as mix
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Sanford Whiteman
swhitemanlistens-softw...@cypressintegrated.com wrote:
Apparently, we are not the only ones confused by edge cases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority
Can you point to where there's any suggestion of using the ceiling
(rounding
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Rafael Dohms lis...@rafaeldohms.com.brwrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Gustavo Lopes glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt
wrote:
There is nothing unclear about a 2/3 majority is required. 2/3 of all
the
votes need not be a integer, but that doesn't mean you
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Sanford Whiteman
swhitemanlistens-softw...@cypressintegrated.com wrote:
Ah, this is why one should trust a coder over a butler:
http://www.ask.com/answers/112530521/5-people-are-voting-what-is-2-3-s-of-a-majority
Ugh.
-- S.
--
PHP Internals - PHP
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
I just closed the vote for this RFC. The result (see
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_isset_exprs#vote) is:
* Both empty() and isset(): 3
* Only empty(): 13
* None: 4
Low turnout is kind of
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Sean Coates s...@seancoates.com wrote:
can I ask how did you come up with that number, and who is the half man?
:)
Rasmus, Andi, and Ze'ev. Andrei works with something PHP-related, sort of,
still, and is only involved on occasion, so I counted him for half.
Hey, I noticed you CC'ed internals, does that mean everyone on the
list is getting this?
Sorry, not entirely familiar with how these mailing lists work.
Yep. And at least for my part, I have no idea what RFC you guys are
talking about lol. ;P
--Kris
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello internals,
I should voice my opinion that such things like comparing two strings
starting with numbers and that they resolve to actual integer/float for
comparation is bad, really bad. That just defies the
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Gustavo Lopes glo...@nebm.ist.utl.ptwrote:
On Mon, 07 May 2012 10:31:00 +0200, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
wrote:
That being said, I agree that this *definitely* should be fixed if the
examples cited are indeed accurate (I've been working with PHP
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Richard Lynch c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 4:43 am, Pierre Joye wrote:
empty() on the other hand, tests if something is empty, and only if
it
is empty. The result of an expression can be empty.
an expression can also have a value of null.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been following the debate and I'm still a bit unclear as to what the
benefit would be to allowing non-variables in isset(). I mean, as was
stated earlier, expressions are neither set nor unset. Furthermore,
if
you
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Jille Timmermans ji...@quis.cx wrote:
On 28-04-12 06:27, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
2012/4/27 Jille Timmermansji...@quis.cx:
I suggest we add a function boolval(). It simply converts the given
argument
to a boolean, like strval(), intval() and floatval().
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
There'd be a minimum of 2 weeks between when an RFC that touches the
language is brought up on this list and when it's voted on is required
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Jille Timmermans ji...@quis.cx wrote:
Hi,
I suggest we add a function boolval(). It simply converts the given
argument to a boolean, like strval(), intval() and floatval(). I already
have an implementation ready[1].
Why?
* It is missing in the current list
Hi all,
I finally found some time today to update the RFC based on discussions
here. Please have a look and let me know if I missed anything or if
there's anything else that needs clarifying:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/phpp
I also want to know if this is sufficient to satisfy some of the
know what it is and I can fix it.
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I finally found some time today to update the RFC based on discussions
here. Please have a look and let me know if I missed anything or if
there's anything else that needs
anything.
24 апреля 2012 г. 22:52 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
написал:
Hi all,
I finally found some time today to update the RFC based on discussions
here. Please have a look and let me know if I missed anything or if
there's anything else that needs clarifying
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Tjerk Meesters tjerk.meest...@gmail.comwrote:
On 25 Apr, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
* The RFC starts off immediately talking about file extensions
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
Please review the section titled Inclusion of Mixed Code, which
contains the quoted conversation I referred to, with commentary about
bad, lazy architecture that is currently standard in numerous
frameworks. I understand
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Sherif Ramadan theanomaly...@gmail.comwrote:
But in order to be case insensitive, PHP needs to know that
strtolower(A)
== 'a'. So if you use Cyrilic for userland functions/classes, php needs a
cyrillic aware strtolower function. Then the problem is that
Ugh I hate to throw a POO into this, but
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
Hey internals :)
As there doesn't seem to be any further discussion regarding my RFC,
I've opened the vote:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_isset_exprs#vote
Nikita
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
Number of posts to internals since Jan.1,2012 (top 15):
[kris.cr...@gmail.com]= 249
Wooot! What's my prize? ;P
Now I just need to start getting some commits in there
--Kris
Sharon,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:42 PM, sle...@pipeline.com wrote:
Stas:
Just b/c there are rarely any women at all that participate on this list,
could we at list maintain a facade of gender neutrality? I seriously can't
believe that you used the word him. What about her? Yeah, her as
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Sean Coates s...@seancoates.com wrote:
Wooot! What's my prize? ;P
Shame.
Hmm can I just opt for the cash payout instead?
--Kris
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Gustavo Lopes glo...@nebm.ist.utl.ptwrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 23:23:35 +0200, Tjerk Meesters
tjerk.meest...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe this has been suggested before, but it would be nice if comments
in, ahem, request for comments could be consolidated into one
Hey guys,
Forgive me if this has been addressed before, but I was wondering: Have we
ever considered maintaining an RPM for PHP dependencies for each version
branch? The are legitimate reasons why people prefer to build PHP manually
instead of building from a repo, but those reasons often don't
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Sean Coates s...@seancoates.com wrote:
My response earlier was meant to be funny, mostly, but I did also intend
to convey some of the same things Rasmus said. The only person who wants to
participate in a conversation where someone is hogging the floor is the
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Sherif Ramadan theanomaly...@gmail.comwrote:
On 04/17/2012 11:41 AM, Kris Craig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com
mailto:ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
Number of posts to internals since Jan.1,2012 (top 15
Arvids,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
What happened with the proposal/RFC for expanding include/require with
additional optional second param to allow for developers to define in place
if he want's a pure PHP file to be included or a template
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Arvids Godjuks
arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
16 апреля 2012 г. 2:52 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.com
wrote:
I posted the bellow text in other thread, but i
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's sad really, to be honest.
I wonder if people even use this:
echo include 'foo.bar', 'baz';
Probably not, Try it! you get:
1baz
It actually works more
2012/4/16 Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com
Also, Kris's proposal requires that an additional flag be tracked all
the way down through the stack of requires and includes from the point
where pure mode is first encountered, remembering that we're in pure
mode. Note that this flag cannot be a global
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 1:02 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick
WIdmervch...@developersdesk.comwrote:
More
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
So this time, I would like focusing only on the following:
I think before going into these, it is important to answer this
question: what is the problem we're trying to solve?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
I reject the premise of that question because it implies that nothing in
PHP should ever be changed unless it's fixing something that's
://wiki.php.net/rfc/source_files_without_opening_tag
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I think the 'as' solution is smart.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Nikita Popov
nikita
/16 Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com:
2012/4/16 Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com
Also, Kris's proposal requires that an additional flag be tracked all
the way down through the stack of requires and includes from the point
where pure mode is first encountered, remembering that we're in pure
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
Such a vote would make sense if it were clearly expressed that the
final RFC would also be subject to a binding vote, so there is no risk
of being forced to accept an implementation whose particular details
are unacceptable
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
16 апреля 2012 г. 22:02 пользователь Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.comнаписал:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rick WIdmer vch...@developersdesk.com
wrote:
On 4/16/2012 3:31 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
That's
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
no, it only means that our internal processes aren't clear or easily
accessible.
people outside the circle can't do much, than asking people inside to
let them in.
If somebody is an outsider to PHP
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to play devil's advocate (Satan and I go way back), what about
people who are established PHP developers but who generally don't
participate in the development/discussion of PHP core? An argument could
be made that,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to play devil's advocate (Satan and I go way back), what about
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Ryan McCue li...@rotorised.com wrote:
Kris Craig wrote:
An argument could be made that, as the users of PHP, they should be able
to have some say in its development.
As a PHP developer (that is, a developer who writes in PHP), I'd agree,
*to an extent
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:20 PM, John LeSueur john.lesu...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.com
wrote:
Kris,
As discussed on other threads, PHPP files
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hi!
Without willing to end discussions prematurely, it looks to me that
everything possible have been said about the various opening tags
proposals.
Actually, we finally appear to be making some headway. I appreciate
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 3:58 AM, David Muir davidkm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14/04/12 03:41, Kris Craig wrote:
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:37 PM, David Muir davidkm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13/04/12 15:13, Kris Craig wrote:
Again, the controller should NOT be a .phpp file. Likewise, your
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Kris Craig wrote:
I object significantly to a few points here. One is the concept of a
magic file extension. Why should a file behave differently just
because of a different extension? In general, extensions
-pure file from a pure file (option 3a), or
* Permit requiring non-pure files from pure files (option 3b).
Question 3 may not be necessary given a possible new parallel approach
being discussed. Please refer to my RFCs thread for details and to weigh
in on that.
I believe Kris Craig and Yasuo
err it might be 1 week, not 2. Either way, it's definitely too soon for
mine to be voted on.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Tom Boutell t...@punkave.com wrote:
I don't think a consensus on the following
Bah sorry everyone, I just woke up and I'm still a little groggy lol. It
is in fact 2 weeks.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
err it might be 1 week, not 2. Either way, it's definitely too soon for
mine to be voted on.
--Kris
On Sun, Apr
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 8:44 AM, John LeSueur john.lesu...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Jannik Zschiesche he...@apfelbox.net
wrote:
Am 15.04.2012 08:20, schrieb John LeSueur:
Since you're looking for input, specifically on the compromise, let's
try
to figure out
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
Well, it's time for me to remind about the techique many use (and some
frameworks provide it out of the box) - the application file concatination
to speed up file loading.
Yii framework provides a Yiilite.php file
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.comwrote:
I posted the bellow text in other thread, but i should have it post here,
so i'm reposting it to this thread.
Well, it's time for me to remind about the techique many use (and some
frameworks provide it out of the
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Ferenc Kovacs tyr...@gmail.com wrote:
The gain has been described by myself and others quite a bit already. As
far as I can tell, the fact that some frameworks/libraries wouldn't be
compatible with this doesn't negate the unrelated advantages that do
exist.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi,
It would be better to vote
- PHP will have script only (tag less) code or not
then
- How it will be implemented
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net
Awhile back, I raised the possibility of
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Rasmus Schultz ras...@mindplay.dk wrote:
From: Arvids Godjuks arvids.godj...@gmail.com
To: Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
Cc: PHP internals list internals@lists.php.net, Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 03:26:16 +0300
Subject: Re
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM, John Crenshaw johncrens...@priacta.comwrote:
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 3:39 PM
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:12 PM, John Crenshaw
johncrens...@priacta.com wrote:
On top of this, there's an argument that you're not addressing:
most
template
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Sherif Ramadan theanomaly...@gmail.comwrote:
Let me say that I've been following this thread for some time now and what
I'm
seeing is a lot of poorly communicated ideas with very little thought
and a lot of
snappy retort.
We can walk and chew gum at the
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Kris Craig wrote:
Please review these things, *then *post a response. Thank you.
If you want this SO badly, just fork a copy of PHP and implement it how
you want it. That is at least the good thing to come out
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.comwrote:
Kris,
It's worth noting that there are already two other similar RFCs that have
been proposed and other people have expressed interest in this idea.
Most
of the opposition on this thread has come from 2 people,
no reason to
read it any further.
6. I will now go back to just criticizing it without actually being
informed.
Author: Kris Craig kriscr...@php.net
I'm reading the correct RFC, am I not? This is *your* RFC? I'm not
confusing this with anyone else's am I?
No, you're not. You're completely
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.comwrote:
Kris,
You do realize you just proved my point, right? I said that, because
only a
small few people were actually participating in this thread, it would be
completely disingenuous for one side or the other to
201 - 300 of 479 matches
Mail list logo
