On 9/14/05, Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any last minute additions to 5.1.0RC2 or can we roll it?
cd php-src/pear wget http://pear.php.net/install-pear.phar
for both sources and win32 releases. As a little reminder :)
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:59:03 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre Joye) wrote:
Except lazyness, there should be no reason to follow this little
rule, thanks :-)
to not follow :)
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 05:06:07 +0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zeev Suraski) wrote:
For those of you who submitted patches to 5.1 since RC1 - do you
believe that we need another RC or can we go ahead and roll 5.1
final and run a sanity test for 24 hours? I went over the
patches, none of them appears
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:12:51 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Sonke Ruempler wrote:
Hi Zeev,
Zeev Suraski mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, August
25, 2005 7:37 PM:
Fatal error: Only variables can be passed by reference in
Hello,
This is a last warning before I cleanup the GD in HEAD.
The cleanup consists of:
* Drop Freetype 1 support
* Drop GD1 support
* Remove functions getting deprecated by the precendent 2 points
* bump the minimum version of the required libs (I left zlib to the
base dependency as it is
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 15:36:55 +0200
Edin Kadribasic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say we do not have to require the latest and the greatest libs.
Just require the latest known working.
I'm using freetype-2.0.9 and libpng-1.0.14 and see no reason why
we should artificially increase the
Hello,
Being in a spring cleaning session, I removed pear from php-src in
HEAD, meaning php 6.0.
I will not introduce it back in any form. The README.PEAR is all I
would like to see in any future PHP distributions. Any other
solutions is impossible to manage in a safe and sane way.
As some
Hello,
PHP 5 was an evolution of php4, adding good OO things and some new
extensions.
PHP 5.1 is going a bit further and make the new engine more
efficient.
Both keep old and annoyed things we had in php4.
PHP 6.0 is not going to be realease in the next months or maybe
even not this year.
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:19:04 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
3. Add input filter extension which will include a mechanism
for application developers to very easily turn it off which
would swap the raw GPC arrays
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:03:36 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ilia Alshanetsky) wrote:
I have a #9 to share, too:
Assuming that PHP 6.0 will also have namespaces support (which
would be cool), it might make sense to move all internal
functions to use namespaces (if they support functions sitting
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:17:52 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Sara Golemon wrote:
7. Make identifiers case-sensitive
Or perhaps optionally case sensitive? I dunno, I've made my
peace with PHP being (mostly) case-insensitive.
We can't
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 00:21:29 +0300 (EEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jani Taskinen) wrote:
Very good idea. We do bundle the thing? :)
I do not think we can use the extern GD2 in the same nice way than
we use ours.
But droping _extern_ gd2 support is possible. The only remaining
thing is to
Hello,
Can we just undeprecate is_a and move on? I do not have zend
karma (hopefully ;), Andi, can you take care of that?
Besides real world usages, the main point is not going to be solved
that soon, both sides can live with an unpedantic is_a (and not
deprecated) and a pedantic instanceof.
Hello,
As there is no way to find a solution to the two different vision
(pedantic, non pedantic ;). I propose to do not deprecate is_a.
It cannot hurt neither is_a (is_a uses instanceof too) or
instanceof. The only cons for is_a is a little slow down, which is
negligeable.
Any objection?
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:31:08 +0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan Knowles) wrote:
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 23:08 -0700, Andi Gutmans wrote:
You are wrong because __autoload() *is* called and you can load
the class on the-fly. The only problem is if the class does not
exist in your code base, in
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:15:15 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
This technique is already frequently used to cope with lazy
loaded code, which even with cached code compilers, is pretty
damn efficient in a scripted
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:41:07 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
Now that we branched it's time to rename HEAD to something else
than 5.1 in order to have different version numbers. Although the
name PHP 5.5 was mentioned before, I do think we should call it
PHP 6.0. As the
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 12:03:28 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Weyert de Boer wrote:
6.0 if the Namespaces patch makes it in, 5.5 with Unicode
only? ;)
Namespaces patch is a patch so it's fine for version 5.5, if
you would ask me. I would see
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:24:56 +0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pasha Zubkov) wrote:
Alan Knowles wrote:
The basic point is that is_a() provided negative testing of
non-existant classes
if (!is_a($obj, SomeRarelyUsedClass)) {
instance_of does not, and can not, at present.
You can use
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 12:47:50 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
But I have some about what we will do in php 5.x (without
unicode, namespace), and 6.0.
I like to see once that we clearly and loudly define what we
want
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:29:45 -0700
Andi Gutmans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we'd have to first try and load the class to make
sure we can actually check the instanceof
Pardon me? :)
As I said in my 2nd post about this topic, the problem (and only
problem here) is that in the lexer, the right
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:25:27 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
I think Unicode warrants a major version. I'd go with PHP 6 and
aim to release it before Perl 6 :)
From judging by a Perl 6 talk we attended at OSCON, that might
actually be a realistic goal.
No rush please... Better
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:44:59 -0700
Andi Gutmans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that's a good point. For the few frameworks that might
require such functionality they can use class_exists() or other
methods. That doesn't mean we should change instanceof for
mainstream usage which is 99.99%.
On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 13:52:13 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Hi all,
Another reminder, I'd like to roll RC1 on Monday. Everyone will
be back from OSCON and we can start the Unicode merge right
afterwards.
One thing I would like to solve in 5.1 is instanceof (or the
Hello,
I took a short look to the implementation.
instanceof_ex works as expected, no error display there. The
problem comes from the usage of class_name_reference in the parser.
class_name_reference calls zend_do_fetch_class, which raises this
error as no class is loaded.
Now I'm not sure
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 15:09:06 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Derick Rethans schrieb:
Throwing two different kinds of Exceptions is evil.
Just as evil as allowing SPL to be disabled.
Not really. SPL is only for
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 15:56:55 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jochem Maas) wrote:
IMHO btw, semantically, calling it S(tandard)PL and then making
it so that it's not standard (i.e. it's an extension) seems odd.
I was pretty sure until today that it was not possible to disable
it. But it's not possible
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 18:26:30 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Wallner) wrote:
Hi Pierre-Alain Joye, you wrote:
I can write a patch to fix it if we agree that the current
behavior is not correct.
While you're at it, could you continue on fixing the following:
(another evidence
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 14:43:25 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
I don't agree that instanceof on a class which doesn't exist
should work. It doesn't do so in other languages (or at least not
in Java/C++(dynamic_cast)) nor does it really seem to make a lot
of sense and be useful.
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:50:07 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Hi all,
As planned (a tiny bit delayed), I'd like to RC1 PHP 5.1 within
the next few days. I suggest to aim for Tuesday in a week.
If there are any critical issues which need addressing please
email me.
Mind to
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:10:59 +0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zeev Suraski) wrote:
At 01:50 AM 7/28/2005, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Are you therefore saying SOAP support should be 100% diabled
when allow_url_fopen is off?
I tend to agree with Adam (and I guess Wez) - SOAP should not be
affected by
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 08:31:04 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
+#ifdef EXPERIMENTAL_DATE_SUPPORT
+ /* Advanced Interface */
+ PHP_FE(date_create, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_format, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_modify, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_timezone_get, NULL)
+
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 08:31:04 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
+#ifdef EXPERIMENTAL_DATE_SUPPORT
+ /* Advanced Interface */
+ PHP_FE(date_create, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_format, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_modify, NULL)
+ PHP_FE(date_timezone_get, NULL)
+
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:40:20 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edin Kadribasic) wrote:
Derick,
Didn't we agree not to do this until 5.1 was released? Please
revert the object support.
Derick told me on IRC that he agreed on that with Andi.
I still think that we should not expose the new lib now. It
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 08:34:05 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manfred Weber) wrote:
cvs account for
/pear/Services_Webservice
http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=262
Pierre told me to ask for cvs account
Confirmed, requires karma for pear/Services_Webservice
--Pierre
--
PHP
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:53:16 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote:
Relax, I'm not debating the decision. Just:
PLEASE can someone put a big fat warning on the php 4.4
announcement on www.php.net that it breaks existing code?
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:04:36 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Just for the record, most compilers have such bugs. It happens
when the compiler is too lenient and allows incorrect code to be
compiled. I've seen similar things happen in C/C++ and other
languages.
Sure :) Was not
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 09:16:29 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
Objects are not harder to implement, I found it actually more
straight forward. Besides that, making it an object allows other
people to extend it, something that Pierre wants for his pecl/
date.
I do not
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 14:31:14 +0200 (CEST)
Derick Rethans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
I would love to be able to do something like this:
$d = new Date(time());
$d-month++;
$d-print(Y-m-d); // date() equiv.
Adding methods is no problem, that's
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 23:10:16 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
Hei,
I wrote up a little document about how I want to implement the
date and timezone classes - although I'm not planning any OO
methods. I'm just wrapping the timelib_time and timelib_tzinfo
structures in
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:56:51 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Hey Derick,
If you're just wrapping the date type with a class, I don't see
why it shouldn't be a resource. It'd give you the same thing but
would be easier to implement (unless I'm missing something).
I realize you
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 11:48:06 +0100
Nuno Lopes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, you can give precedence to the ini option over the TZ var.
That way you don't need the functions.
IMHO this is the better choice, as it allows you to set a site
wide ini option, without touching in the environment
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:52:24 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
The database can not be editable this easily, but that should not
be needed anyway.
No it's not that easy to make it editable. It should have been
easier using hashtables or other methods.
For aliases, these
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:16:53 +0200 (CEST)
Derick Rethans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Oslon's database changes (rarely but does :).
It actually does about once a month...
I meant the amount of usefull changes. I can see some advantages to
move the TZ as an extension. It can contains only the
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:32:28 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nuno Lopes) wrote:
Last point, can you rename date_timezone_* to
date_default_timezone_*?
Yes, but it's too long. Can we come up with something better?
Derick
Sorry, but I still didn't understand why the need for those
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:44:29 +0100
Nuno Lopes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you sure?
I was not :) but still remains TS issues and inconsistencies
between OSes.
In short, we need this function, we can move to the name choice
now :)
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:10:42 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nuno Lopes) wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
I was not :) but still remains TS issues and inconsistencies
between OSes.
Don't forget the thread safety issues...
In short, we need this function, we can move
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:56:41 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
I was not :) but still remains TS issues and inconsistencies
between OSes.
Don't forget the thread safety issues...
In short, we need this function, we can
On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 13:38:38 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nuno Lopes) wrote:
So, you can give precedence to the ini option over the TZ var.
That way you don't need the functions.
IMHO this is the better choice, as it allows you to set a site
wide ini option, without touching in the environment
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 07:52:04 -0400
Wez Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/30/05, Pierre-Alain Joye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So to summarize a schedule I suggest:
a) 5.1.0 Beta 3 Friday, July 8th.
b) Release branch 5.1.0 RC1 July 15-22nd
c) Mid-July start merging Unicode into HEAD
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:35:22 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Yep that was exactly the reason.
We've had these feature freezes in the past and we will branch
off after RC1 to allow commiting to HEAD (sans core due to
Unicode merge). So it's really minimal time (2-3 weeks) which
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:06:41 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Orton) wrote:
We're getting a lot of reports from Fedora Core 4 users that the
shipped PHP 5.0.4 is triggering some refcounting bug breaking
some common apps; the attached file is a repro case which
triggers the segfault after
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:12:11 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jani Taskinen) wrote:
sniperThu Jun 16 19:12:11 2005 EDT
Added files:
/php-src/ext/date/lib timelib.m4
Modified files:
/php-src/ext/date config.m4 php_date.c
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:36:38 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lukas Smith) wrote:
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
LSI think its a good idea to have, to make it somewhat
LSpossible to prepare for the PHP5 E_STRICT world, while
LSstill developing PHP4 compatible code. I could for example
LSsee this
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:06:48 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
At 07:41 PM 6/11/2005 +0200, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hi Wez and all,
I built Beta 2 with the latest CVS which appears to have
Wez's fixes.
Please
check it out
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 09:07:26 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I'll roll PHP 5.1 Beta 1 tomorrow. Hopefully we will then start
getting some very much needed feedback from the public for HEAD.
I'll put the date time stuff in
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 22:29:13 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Johannes Schlueter wrote:
Is there progress with the new date stuff? I'd really like to
have dates before 1970.
Should go in this week.
Finally :)
If Derick's TZ and new strtotime
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 23:57:40 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Zülke) wrote:
How about bundling PIMP with 5.1? ;o)
Pimp as php ext is not on my top priority :) However it should be
available on its own repository later this summer.
That said, for the current GD, I'm working to sync the Boutell and
On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:00:18 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zeev Suraski) wrote:
Folks,
We have a bit of a situation with the PEAR distro that's embedded
in 5.0.4. It's missing the RunTest.php file, so PEAR doesn't
install.
The options we have, as far as I can tell, are:
[a] Re-release
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:20:36 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Beaver) wrote:
Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Windows binaries are now available at:
PHP 5.0.4RC1
http://downloads.php.net/edink/php-5.0.4RC1-Win32.zip
PHP 4.3.11RC1
http://downloads.php.net/edink/php-4.3.11RC1-Win32.zip
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:19:41 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Convissor) wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:54:54PM +0100, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
Feel like it was not updated on the building host. PEAR should
be 1.3.5, I do not remember the other, but the script should be
updated.
I
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:24:02 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Kingma | jool.nl) wrote:
Hi Rob / Chregu,
As a first (small) step to implementing xml-security specs
(dig-sign, encryption) I created a patch against HEAD to expose
(exclusive-)C14n functionality from libxml2. I allows you to
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 08:35:09 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
I think the right way to implement this is in a development tools.
There is other data that needs to be gathered for creating a WSDL
file such as URI, authentication (if required) etc.
I agree here. However having a:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:26:06 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Schlossnagle) wrote:
On Feb 12, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I think the right way to implement this is in a development
tools. There is other data that needs to be gathered for
creating a WSDL file such as URI,
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 11:47:13 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
Use C++/Java if you want this.
Java does not support operator overloading.
So, that means PHP shouldn't get it either, right? ;-)
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:00:13 +0200 (IST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stanislav Malyshev) wrote:
SB patch [1] by Johannes Schl?ter that has been floating around
SBfor a while?
1. I personally don't think operator overloading is a good idea.
It doesn't add you anything you couldn't do without it the
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:12:44 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terje Slettebø) wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 11:47:13 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
Use C++/Java if you want this.
Java does
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:02:19 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrey Hristov) wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
I think it's a stupid idea (actually OO is a stupid idea but
that's something for another dicussion ;-):
1. In order to silently ignore failed queries you still have to
put a
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:18:51 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Coggeshall) wrote:
snip
Again, we are talking about a very specific situation (PHP 5
extensions written using a dual-syntax model).Things in the PHP 4
branch are not an issue here, there is no expectation that such
things would be
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:50:08 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ilia Alshanetsky) wrote:
On March 11, 2004 08:43 am, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Any idea why the bugs database isn't responding?
Works fine for me, perhaps this is a networking issue?
Yes, a lot of sites are not available due to some huge
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:26:35 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre-Alain Joye) wrote:
We use exit(1) inside an instance of an PEAR_Frontend_CLI object,
removing it do not crash. Still no small script to reproduce...
Fixed by the last commits
pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:22:07 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre-Alain Joye) wrote:
Hello,
The following command segfaults (equivalent to pear.sh package):
# cd /path/to/pecl/philter
# php /path/to/pearcmd.php package
please find the backtrace and valgring output as attachments.
I do
Hello,
What is the usage of get_property_ptr_ptr by ZE2?
For what I read, it is used by the post/pre increment (++,.= and
friends) and in zend_binary_assign_op_obj_helper. I do not know
where the later is used.
What I would like is to know when I am in a pre/post increment
operator and allow
Hello,
The following command segfaults (equivalent to pear.sh package):
# cd /path/to/pecl/philter
# php /path/to/pearcmd.php package
please find the backtrace and valgring output as attachments.
I do not have the time right now to find where it segfaults or to
produce a reproduce script,
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 19:18:09 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
I actually couldn't reproduce the crash with your script but I
found problems with my patch using valgrind.
Commit coming up in a second.
Let me know if it solves your problem.
Thanks for the short reproducing script.
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 19:10:34 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ard Biesheuvel) wrote:
This script crashes with the latest HEAD.
I don't know if it is something that did work at an earlier time.
Works here, can you try a fresh update?
pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:18:09 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
definitely be fixed. A couple of others don't look like show
stoppers. If there's anyone here who can look at the non-Zend
Engine ones that would be nice.
Is it ok to commit this patch (attachment) to fix #27238? (Do
Hello,
I'm wondering if this syntax is deprecated or not:
function f() {
return $foo;
}
$h = f();
ideas?
pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:02:38 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre-Alain Joye) wrote:
Here it is.
I put it in tests/lang/foreach_with_new_object_001.phpt
take #2, .txt :)
--TEST--
foreach() with foreach($o-mthd()-arr)
--FILE--
?php
class Test {
public $a = array(1,2,3,4,5); // removed, crash
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:56:08 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andi Gutmans) wrote:
Nope. I don't have time to add one right now...
Pierre got time? :)
If not I'll try and do it within the next few days.
Here it is.
I put it in tests/lang/foreach_with_new_object_001.phpt
hth
pierre
--
PHP
Hello,
Regarding the question about how to know if a method is declared static
or not, I add the fn_flags to the result (flags property) of
getMethod();. I tested it with PHP userland classes but not internal
objects. This new property reflects the internal fn_flags in
zend_function struct. The
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:49:42 +0100
Marcus Boerger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A static and a non static member function are two absolute completley
different things. Anyway calling a static method from an instance as
$instance-staticmethod() or $instance::staticmethod() should be
allowed. I
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:02:10 +0100 (CET)
Derick Rethans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it should get set in non-static methods...which doesn't happen now
:)
$this is set in non static methods if the method is called from an
instance of the object and not set if called statically. It's exactly
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:21:50 +0100
Marcus Boerger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But why the hell do you want a message, calling a static method from
anywhere is absolutley fine. This of course includes calling a static
method of an instance's class, however that is syntactically
accomplished.
I
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 02:53:50 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Coggeshall) wrote:
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=27304
Marcus says he's brought this up before, and i think it really needs
to be addressed before PHP 5 so I'm bringing it up again. I am told
that currently we are allowing static
Hello,
Having the scripts pasted below:
include_once fails to declare the variable 'foo'. Replace include_once
by include and it works. I got the same behavior using require and
require_once.
Am I wrong to see that as a bug?
inc.php
?php
$foo = var from include;
?
testinc.php
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:27:56 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre-Alain Joye) wrote:
Hello,
Having the scripts pasted below:
include_once fails to declare the variable 'foo'. Replace include_once
by include and it works. I got the same behavior using require and
require_once.
To be precised
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:44:10 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hartmut Holzgraefe) wrote:
it works for the first call to getFoo(),
on any following call include_once
will ignore inc.php as it was already
included before, and as $foo is a local
variable to getFoo() it won't exist in
any but the first
Forget it. That works the same way in php4.
Sorry for the noise :)
pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:23:04 -0500
John Coggeshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
class foo {
static function bar() {
}
}
$a = new foo();
$a-bar(); /* Unacceptable and contradictory to the concept of static
*/ foo::bar(); /* Acceptable */
I have the same problem as George :) I did
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:14:04 -0500
John Coggeshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if I download a new class from some site, or otherwise use someone
else's code, how do I know other than digging through the source on
a method's context? If $this isn't set I can't do the check, and if
then engine
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 12:33:35 -0500
John Coggeshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. There is *no* reason why static methods should be called from an
object context. Doing so is more than a notice -- its flat out wrong
and defeats the entire purpose of having static in the first place...
I only
Hello,
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:17:54 -0500
Rob Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ran into this with simplexml but am able to reproduce with userland
classes.
The segfault only occurs when the property in question does not exist,
no __get and __set methods implemented (if either is
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:05:38 +0200 (IST)
Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PJ Indeed, compare apples and peanuts, all good ;). What's about the
PJper host module?
I think it's a valid concern, but using dl() for it is not good, at
least in its present form.
By the way, how
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:46:21 -
Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zeev Wed Feb 11 06:46:21 2004 EDT
Modified files:
/php-src/ext/standard dl.c
Log:
Finally add a notice to hint people that using dl() is a bad idea...
+
Organization: Freelancer
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:07:16 +0200
Andi Gutmans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pierre,
Just to add to this,
Organization: Freelancer
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:41:19 +0200 (IST)
Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which languages are
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:25:33 +0200 (IST)
Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most languages even don't have a concept of extensions, so I don't
see any point here. That's like saying why I can't work with
processor registers in PHP - in Assembler I could.
No it is not. And this
Organization: Freelancer
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:25:33 +0200 (IST)
Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those of us not
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:40:33 +0200 (IST)
Stanislav Malyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Concepts of modules differ. PHP is built, more or less, so that you
write in PHP using existing language facilities, and aren't supposed
to change the facilities from PHP. That's why dl() is problematic - it
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
