Hi Ben,
On 28 February 2013 01:56, Ben Ramsey wrote:
> Sorry. I got sick for a few weeks, and this fell to the bottom of my
> priorities list.
>
> I'm not sure what the next steps are. This was approved by a majority vote.
> What do I need to do now to get it into 5.5?
>
> Thanks,
> Ben
>
The ne
On 14 March 2013 08:35, Sara Golemon wrote:
> Some unofficial votes going either way... Let's open the voting to
> see where things fall.
>
Don't forget to start a new thread, as described in the Voting RFC [1].
[1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting#voting
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Develop
Hi,
On 4 February 2013 07:41, Martin Keckeis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> netcraft got new numbers. Maybe the outdated usage page could get updated?
> http://www.php.net/usage.php
>
> http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2013/01/31/php-just-grows-grows.html
>
I have been in touch with Netcraft about updatin
Hi Ben,
On 12 January 2013 00:17, Ben Ramsey wrote:
> I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC.
>
> You can vote at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_column#voting
>
> Regards,
> Ben
>
The vote has been open for almost three weeks and discussion tailed
off after only a few days here.
On 30 January 2013 18:48, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
> Is there a desire from anyone to gracefully throw E_DEPRECATED in a future
> version of PHP 5.x when someone tries to __toString() the SplFileObject but
> only get back a single line ?
Absolutely not.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development M
On 28 January 2013 12:03, Clint Priest wrote:
>
> If you're still worried about this making it in, don't worry. Nikita and I
> have given up, to the determinant of the community.
>
Then please close the voting.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http:
On 14 January 2013 09:11, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> I opened the voting phase for the 5.3 EOL RFC.
>
Is there any reason why this RFC was not listed on the RFC listing
page? I have added it to the "In voting phase" list, assuming you
merely forgot to add it anywhere.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
On 12 January 2013 16:41, Ben Ramsey wrote:
>
> I must have misread the Git Workflow page of the wiki, which states:
>
> "A patch will be applied to the oldest possible branch. If the Release
> Manager of 5.3 accepts the change, commit it to the 5.3 branch. We will use
> regular merging between th
On 12 January 2013 20:06, Galen Wright-Watson wrote:
>
> Just to be clear, do you mean the result would be:
> array($keys[0] => array($vals0[0], $vals1[0], ...),
> $keys[1] => array($vals0[1], $vals1[1], ...),
> ...)
>
> so the i-th item in the result would be an array with
On 12 January 2013 00:17, Ben Ramsey wrote:
> I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC.
>
> You can vote at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_column#voting
>
I like the idea of this function, but have a few minor questions re.
the current implementation.
1. Why is this branch based on
On 12 January 2013 00:17, Ben Ramsey wrote:
> I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC.
>
> You can vote at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_column#voting
>
> Regards,
> Ben
>
The "Status" for this RFC is still "Under discussion" and on the RFC
listing page it is the same. Is not chan
On 9 January 2013 01:08, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> I've started working on a new proposal, but I'm getting hung up on the
> syntax - if we can't use angle brackets anymore, what can we use? Virtually
> every symbol on a standard US keyword is an operator of some sort, does
> that mean those are all
On 20 December 2012 20:06, Lazare Inepologlou wrote:
>> Of course, I have no idea if anyone in userspace is using
> DateTimeImmutable...
>
> Well, it seems unlikely, unless he is Yoda or French.
>
> I mean, in English, it is common to put the adjective in front of the noun,
> isn't it?
Class name
On 29 November 2012 08:27, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> No there is not [precedent to remove from core without deprecating first],
> not since the RFC introduction. Removing
> extension in minor (x.y+1 or x.y.z+1) is not allowed.
>
Moving an extension to PECL in a minor version increment is allowed,
p
On 13 November 2012 16:07, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> What I would suggest, is not adding E_DEPRECATED for 5.5. Instead,
> officially deprecate it in the docs. Then start a PR campaign to get
> projects like WP to switch away from it. Get the word out there as much as
> possible. Then in 1 to 2 year
Pushing to internals list.
On 5 November 2012 20:41, Levi Morrison wrote:
> I hear people complaining about this out in user-land all the time, but
> I've never seen anyone from internals respond. With practically everyone
> using an autoloader these days, it really borks your workflow to use
> `
On 2 September 2012 22:20, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> Yeah, I understand you don't see a reason. That's what scares me. For
> debugging I definetely wouldn't want to have my datetimes mangled to
> just show UTC. I wouldn't even be able to see the difference between 4pm
> London and 5pm Amsterdam ti
On 26 August 2012 19:20, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Putting aside the fact that democracy has very little to do with what
> we're trying to do here (we're not government, we're opensource
> project), that's how democracy *doesn't work*. As you noticed, it is
> "too bad", and it is exactly the problem
On 26 August 2012 18:48, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
>> I got a PHP Wiki account but couldn't vote. Are you sure the Wiki
>> accounts got the permissions to vote?
>
> Hm... Not sure, maybe somebody has to enable it?
There is a special group ("voting" IIRC) for wiki accounts with voting
rights. "Ordin
On 21 August 2012 23:26, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> array_walk is the best(fast and memory efficient) way
> to delete elements.
If array_walk() is the best (fast and memory efficient) way to delete
elements, why have we had the following line in the manual, for the
array_walk() callback, for over a de
On 3 August 2012 16:09, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> Is this all the documentation there is for the use-clause for
> anonymous closures?
>
> http://us2.php.net/manual/en/functions.anonymous.php
>
> For one, it would be nice to have documentation that explains whether
> the variables listed in the use-c
On 2 August 2012 09:36, Morgan L. Owens wrote:
> Just as each release announcement dated with detailed kept on a distinct
> page (linked in that list), all that's needed there is a date when support
> ended, with (any available) information on what was obsoleted in the process
> also on a distinct
On 2 August 2012 07:35, Adam Harvey wrote:
> Thoughts? (Do we even want to auto-fill this from $OLDRELEASES, or
> would we rather have a manual array?) Specific notes on
> vulnerabilities to add to branches? Better versions of the copy in the
> initial blurb?
Why is this information not just disp
On 18 April 2012 11:38, Daniel Macedo wrote:
> You can't do that, NULL is a perfectly acceptable value to pass into a
> function, you wouldn't be able to know when you wanted to pass NULL or
> use the default value, e.g.:
>
>
You totally missed the point: hinting, not-so-subtly, at the
long-estab
On 18 April 2012 10:25, Daniel Macedo wrote:
> But I couldn't support the comma train, for the insane «lots of
> parameters» case, would hate to read some fn($some $var,,, $other)
> call.
> I'd rather reuse a reserved word like 'default' (or even get a shorter
> one?)
>
>
How about "null"? (T
On 30 March 2012 12:35, Peter Cowburn wrote:
>
> Thanks. Here's an updated patch since Pierre changed the firebird karma.
> Maybe Pierre could apply this? :)
>
Philip has applied the patch, I don't know how often the git server updates
the karma file but you should be able
On 30 March 2012 12:28, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> nice catch!
>
Thanks. Here's an updated patch since Pierre changed the firebird karma.
Maybe Pierre could apply this? :)
Index: global_avail
===
--- global_avail(revision 32463
On 30 March 2012 11:51, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> AFAIK mariuz should have karma for the interbase and pdo_firebird exts, see
>
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/SVNROOT/global_avail?view=markup#l176 and
> http://svn.php.net/viewvc/SVNROOT/global_avail?view=markup#l292
> so it is either a bug in the new kar
Hi Pierre,
The length of the reply being replied
On 7 March 2012 10:12, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
>
to is irrelevant. The length of the reply is also
> > The mailinglist guidelines also are for you, so let me repeat what I
> > wrote yester
On 2 March 2012 01:56, Philip Olson wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Please clarify whether or not get_magic_quotes_gpc() and
> get_magic_quotes_runtime()
> are deprecated, because I do not think they are. Deprecated means people
> should not
> use them while writing new code, but they are perfectly sensible
On 15 December 2011 16:19, David Soria Parra wrote:
> As outlined in my previous post. An author in git is identified
> by "NAME ". We will rewrite commit information to match
> this format during the SVN to Git migration. At the moment
> this affects php-src only, but it will probably expand to o
Hi Laruence et al.
On 30 November 2011 06:06, Laruence wrote:
> Hi:
>
> base on feature request: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60408 , I
> wrote a patch to make php support const array/string dereference
>
> rfc is here, https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constdereference
>
> any opinions?
Could y
Hi guys,
I am removing my vote due to a particularly annoying aspect of this
whole RFC/voting structure: the RFC is still in flux!
How on earth are we supposed to be able to vote yay/nay on something
if that something keeps changing, or is very poorly defined? I request
that the RFC itself be dis
On 26 November 2010 19:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class foo exte
On 24 October 2011 15:57, David Coallier wrote:
> On 24 October 2011 16:53, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:47 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> Hi internals,
>>>
>>> It's been a while since Stas accepted that, but it seems the class
>>> haven't been merged since the
Hi Nikita,
On 9 October 2011 18:14, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi list!
>
> PHP 5.4 added array dereferencing support (e.g. `func()[1]`), but the
> grammar seems to lack support for dereferencing using the alternative
> array access syntax (e.g. `func(){1}`). Was this done on purpose or
> was it just
On 29 August 2011 08:21, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:20 AM, PEAR Announce wrote:
>> The new PEAR package DB_DataObject-1.9.6 (stable) has been released at
>> http://pear.php.net/.
>>
>> Release notes
>> -
>> Small fix release.
>>
>> #18749 - Fix is_a() for 5.3.7
On 18 July 2011 10:45, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Peter Cowburn
> wrote:
>
>> My meaning was simply that trying to explain what was being voted on,
>> after the vote has closed, is too late. I'm aware of the previous
>> discussions o
On 18 July 2011 10:19, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Peter Cowburn
> wrote:
>> On 18 July 2011 10:05, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Peter Cowburn
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 17 July 2011 10:08, Stas Malysh
On 18 July 2011 10:05, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Peter Cowburn
> wrote:
>> On 17 July 2011 10:08, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>>>
>>> Remove magic quotes
>>>
>>> Votes: 54 total, 21 PHP Core, 33 comm
On 17 July 2011 10:08, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
> Remove magic quotes
>
> Votes: 54 total, 21 PHP Core, 33 community
> For removal: PHP group support: 18 (85%), community: 32 (96%)
>
> Again, 3 people voted against: derick,salathe,zeev. Any comments?
>
Like everyone else, I want
On 11 July 2011 20:07, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 7/11/11 11:24 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>
>> The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
>> really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
>> Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement b
2011/7/11 Hannes Magnusson :
> 2011/7/10 Johannes Schlüter :
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 12:04 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
>>>
>>> Having the behavior cleared I wonder how useful it is in practical
>>> terms. A class type hint guarantees me I can do a specific call to
>>> methods defined
On 6 July 2011 16:04, Richard Quadling wrote:
> On 6 July 2011 15:14, Mike Robinson wrote:
>> On July-06-11 12:58 AM Adam Harvey wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 6 July 2011 06:00, Richard Quadling wrote:
>>> > I'd also add in the display_startup_errors to this also. As I see it,
>>> > the idea is to make th
On 13 June 2011 13:40, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> As I have nothing against a mentor program, nor something in favor of
> one, I think it should be done right from the 1st day. And to be in
> right it has to be open, by all means. Restricted lists, private
> discussions, etc. have no place in OS
+1 from me to *any* of the short-form suggestions (JSON or otherwise).
On 31 May 2011 19:42, Brian Moon wrote:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortsyntaxforarrays
>
> Since this was brought again recently by Rasmus
> (http://markmail.org/message/fx3brcm4ekh645se) and on Twitter where several
> people
Hi folks,
On 16 May 2011 22:25, Etienne Kneuss wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On May 16 16:52:08, Andrew Curioso wrote:
>> Well, that wasn't where I was expecting that thread to go, but to wrap it up
>> what do you think...
>> Is it too late to put this on the 5.4 roadmap for consideration?
>>
>> I'm assuming
On 31 March 2011 16:43, Brian Moon wrote:
>>> How would str_contains() be different from strstr()?
>>>
>>>
>> They differ in the return type
>
> $instr = (bool)strstr($string1, $string2);
>
> done. No need for a new function.
God forbid anyone use (bool)strstr("something0", "0") !
>
> Brian.
>
>
Hi all,
On 15 March 2011 09:35, Nick Pope wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> Since Etienne brought it up, would it not also make sense for you to
> implement countWords() and countBytes()?
For countBytes() how is that different from SplFileInfo's getSize() ?
As for countWords() and the others, I think t
On 15 November 2010 17:07, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'll start a series of topics (in this thread) about meta attribute
> (aka. Annotations) discussion.
> So as soon as we agree on each topic I'll open another point to be discussed.
> Only when we reach some consensus I'll
On 23 September 2010 21:39, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
> I think leave both ways, because it's really much of the code uses actually
> {4} rather than [4] for strings.
> But please do the substr functionality as it was suggested a few years
> before. That makes perfect sense :)
>
Are there any further
On 28 September 2010 08:19, Michael Wallner wrote:
> On 09/28/2010 07:05 AM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> 2010/9/27 Johannes Schlüter:
>>>
>>> I think Mike's point was that these functions, according to the comment,
>>> only exist for BC reasons. So they should either keep BC or be d
On 22 September 2010 22:34, Philip Olson wrote:
> Greetings geeks,
>
> This topic still lacks a defined conclusion. There are several rumors that
> something was decided, but I can't confirm this without archived proof.
> Here's the code:
>
> $str = "I am an array of characters, but still a str
On 1 July 2010 11:21, Richard Quadling wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Is there any documentation regarding this change?
http://php.net/functions.arguments says "Note: As of PHP 5, default
values may be passed by reference."
>
> function ca_getUserDetails($pUserid, &$pResults=array()) {}
>
> is fully allowable
On 19 May 2010 13:31, Richard Quadling wrote:
> On 19 May 2010 13:27, mathieu.suen wrote:
>> Ok so there is no real meaning behind the "abstract".
>> Thanks
>>
>> On 05/18/2010 05:55 PM, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote:
>>>
>>> Normally, PHP won't allow access types for interface methods, but the
>>> r
On 11 May 2010 13:33:46 UTC+1, Richard Quadling
wrote:
> On 6 May 2010 08:55, Peter Cowburn wrote:
>> On 5 May 2010 17:25, Richard Quadling wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> I'm in the process of getting the PHPDoc classes showing the correct
>>> inherite
On 5 May 2010 17:25, Richard Quadling wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm in the process of getting the PHPDoc classes showing the correct
> inherited properties and methods (public/protected but not private).
>
> I picked RecursiveRegexIterator (it has the largest number of
> xi:includes in the documentation) a
On 27 April 2010 09:17, Etienne Kneuss wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it looks like the fact that ArrayAccess::offsetGet is not returning a
> reference is a recurrent problem, I see basically 4 options:
>
> a) Ignore the issue, change nothing
>
> b) Rewrite offsetGet to return a ref, breaking BC
-1,000,000
>
>
2010/4/15 Derick Rethans :
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
>
>> Update: http://phpbenelux.eu/array_seek-return.patch.txt
>> I've kept the fseek()-style return values (0 when fine, -1 when seek
>> fails)
>> >>>
>> >>> Any reason why you picked that over the (IMO more
101 - 159 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
