On 19 Jan 2015, at 07:52, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/18/2015 02:08 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
We have to be really really careful with this oh, that code is wrong,
so we can break it argument. This will break hundreds if not thousands
of sites in a hard-to-debug way. It
On 01/18/2015 09:00 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
That would also mean a future sorting API could unify user sorts and non-user
sorts: just make the default callback be cmp().
Usage would be like this:
cmp(1, 2); // 1
cmp(1, 1); // 0
cmp(2, 1); // 1
Essentially, exactly like the spaceship
Hey:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/18/2015 02:08 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
We have to be really really careful with this oh, that code is wrong,
so we can break it argument. This will break hundreds if not thousands
of sites in a
On 01/18/2015 02:08 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
We have to be really really careful with this oh, that code is wrong,
so we can break it argument. This will break hundreds if not thousands
of sites in a hard-to-debug way. It took me less than a minute of
looking on Github to find a case that
Hey:
Rasmus, Thanks for the reporting... I didn't think it is a real
reasonable question at the very beginning
Anyway, this should be fixed in :
https://github.com/php/php-src/commit/020b51b46eceb1a8c2876aac263772ed55ba9a1a
thanks
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Xinchen Hui
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/18/2015 11:45 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Yes, like I said, I am aware that the comparison function is flaky
but it is still code that has worked for 15 years so we have to be
clear about the BC break. The
On 19 Jan 2015, at 05:03, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/18/2015 09:00 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
That would also mean a future sorting API could unify user sorts and
non-user sorts: just make the default callback be cmp().
Usage would be like this:
cmp(1, 2); // 1
Hey Rasmus,
On 19 Jan 2015, at 04:52, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/18/2015 02:08 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
We have to be really really careful with this oh, that code is wrong,
so we can break it argument. This will break hundreds if not thousands
of sites in a
On 19 Jan 2015, at 05:00, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
Related: since we have no Perl-like spaceship operator ($a = $b), writing
comparison functions is unnecessarily complex in the common case, as you must
produce -1, 0, 1 yourself.
Could we expose a cmp() or compare() function
Hi!
Yes, like I said, I am aware that the comparison function is flaky
but it is still code that has worked for 15 years so we have to be
clear about the BC break. The fact that it works up until the array
Looking at that function, I'm not sure the fact it worked is not pure
luck. It is not
On 01/18/2015 11:45 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Yes, like I said, I am aware that the comparison function is flaky
but it is still code that has worked for 15 years so we have to be
clear about the BC break. The fact that it works up until the array
Looking at that function, I'm not
That’s an invalid comparison function. It causes the current usort to reverse
sort the array and I see no problem with that changing (you’re saying that a
value for $a less than $b is in fact greater than it, and a value of $b less
than or equal to $a is equal to it).
On 17/01/2015, at 06:17,
On 01/16/2015 03:54 PM, Simon J Welsh wrote:
That’s an invalid comparison function. It causes the current usort to reverse
sort the array and I see no problem with that changing (you’re saying that a
value for $a less than $b is in fact greater than it, and a value of $b less
than or equal
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 03:54 PM, Simon J Welsh wrote:
That’s an invalid comparison function. It causes the current usort to
reverse sort the array and I see no problem with that changing (you’re
saying that a value for
On Jan 16, 2015, at 19:18, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 03:54 PM, Simon J Welsh wrote:
That’s an invalid comparison function. It causes the current usort to
reverse sort the array and I
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On Jan 16, 2015, at 19:18, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 03:54 PM, Simon J Welsh wrote:
That’s an invalid
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On Jan 16, 2015, at 19:18, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
Hey:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Xinchen Hui larue...@php.net wrote:
but okey, I agree we need write some note(actually I noted in UPGRADE
of we are using hybrid sorting algo now)..
but what kindof note I mean how
18 matches
Mail list logo
