hi Hannes,
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Hannes Magnusson
wrote:
> The UPGRADING file has usually served as a base for
> php.net/migration53 for example.
> Its been a quite confusing topic though, stuff added in bugfix
> release.. should that go there too?
> The migration docs generally list
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:24, Hannes Magnusson
wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:40, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Stas Malyshev
>> wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On 10/7/11 11:13 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
The UPGRADING file is also completely worthless
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:40, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 10/7/11 11:13 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>>
>>> The UPGRADING file is also completely worthless.
>>> I have no idea what is going on, as a dev, nor as a documentor.
hi,
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 10/7/11 11:13 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>
>> The UPGRADING file is also completely worthless.
>> I have no idea what is going on, as a dev, nor as a documentor.
>> Be it traits, closures, or whatever random new parameter or
Hi!
On 10/7/11 11:13 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
The UPGRADING file is also completely worthless.
I have no idea what is going on, as a dev, nor as a documentor.
Be it traits, closures, or whatever random new parameter or function was added.
When 5.3 came around, I literally had to diff the sour
Hi!
On 10/7/11 8:13 PM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
The UPGRADING file is also completely worthless.
I have no idea what is going on, as a dev, nor as a documentor.
Be it traits, closures, or whatever random new parameter or function was added.
When 5.3 came around, I literally had to diff the sourc
On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 11:02:57 +0100, Frédéric Hardy
wrote:
Hello !
I don't think so, but if I had to summarize the innovations in 5.4,
this would be it:
- Closures can now have an associated scope
- Closures can now have a bound object
- Closures can now be either static or non-static
-
Hello !
> I don't think so, but if I had to summarize the innovations in 5.4, this
> would be it:
>
> - Closures can now have an associated scope
> - Closures can now have a bound object
> - Closures can now be either static or non-static
>
> - Closures defined in a place with an active scope a
On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 20:32:24 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
"- Closures can now have an associated scope"
as it is
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#privateprotected_members_scope
?
at first I thought that scope means Variable scope, but I think I get
it now: it means that when
'
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 18:31:42 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>> do we have a wiki/documentation about what exactly ended up in 5.4
>> from the Closure improvements? (Rebind)
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#privatepro
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 08:13:49PM +0200, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>
> When 5.3 came around, I literally had to diff the sources to figure
> out what was going on, I am not going through that again.
...
> If that doesn't happen, we wind up with more features like streams and
> filters which took 5+
On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 18:31:42 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
do we have a wiki/documentation about what exactly ended up in 5.4
from the Closure improvements? (Rebind)
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#privateprotected_members_scope
is really hard to read, as it contains all of the
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 19:31, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 8/28/11 10:55 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
>>>
>>> I should ask someone with Zend karma to commit the closure rebinding
>>> patch.
>>>
>>> Context:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.php.net/rf
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 8/28/11 10:55 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
>>
>> I should ask someone with Zend karma to commit the closure rebinding
>> patch.
>>
>> Context:
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#privateprotected_members_scope
>>
>>
Hannes Magnusson wrote:
My test failure seem to be both caused by data difference, but also
float precision and timezone issues, and thats within our domain to
ensure is working fine.
The remaining interbase/firebird errors are similar niggles ... but I'm not sure
just how one would know that
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Hannes Magnusson
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 23:44, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Stas Malyshev
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is data may vary by CLDR version, etc. and keeping pace with all
>>> variants on all platforms, etc. will
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 23:44, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Stas Malyshev
> wrote:
>
>> The problem is data may vary by CLDR version, etc. and keeping pace with all
>> variants on all platforms, etc. will be a nightmare.
>
> To have a couple of versions, say x.y, x.y+1
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> The problem is data may vary by CLDR version, etc. and keeping pace with all
> variants on all platforms, etc. will be a nightmare.
To have a couple of versions, say x.y, x.y+1 sounds reasonable and possible.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
@pierrejo
Hi!
On 9/15/11 2:39 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
We do need tests per version. The EXPECTF-
becomes more and more necessary :)
The problem is data may vary by CLDR version, etc. and keeping pace with
all variants on all platforms, etc. will be a nightmare.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 9/14/11 1:25 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>
>> Could you look at the intl tests?
>> I have similar failures the the gcov, plus couple of more I sent you
>> the other day.
>
> Yes, I will. From casual look it seems like they are cau
Hi!
On 9/14/11 1:25 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
Could you look at the intl tests?
I have similar failures the the gcov, plus couple of more I sent you
the other day.
Yes, I will. From casual look it seems like they are caused by variation
between ICU versions, I'll look into how to make tests
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:28, Pierre Joye wrote:
> please post errors&co to the list, ccing the maintainers too. It is
> then easier to be in sync.
I really do not like it when you assume everyone else are idiots.
I ofcourse already sent it, in fact, it was in a reply about intl
tests failure th
please post errors&co to the list, ccing the maintainers too. It is
then easier to be in sync.
About intl, it seems that many tests are ICU version specific
(regarding unicode and formatting rules correctness). Maybe we need to
add a couple of skipif and use the latest ICU version only as base
(wh
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 07:46, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> It looks like the situation with the tests significantly improved (again,
> thanks a lot for everybody who took part!), so I plan to package 5.4 beta
> tomorrow. If you have any fixes that must be in the beta (please test! ;),
> please
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Laruence wrote:
>
>> SessionHandler is not stable now, and remain some bugs need to be
>> fixed(one open bug #55690, and test failed)
>
> It's a beta release. Bugs may occur (that's why we have betas!).
it's true, bu
Hi:
Sure, I just said need to be double check. :P
thanks
2011/9/14 Derick Rethans :
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Laruence wrote:
>
>> SessionHandler is not stable now, and remain some bugs need to be
>> fixed(one open bug #55690, and test failed)
>
> It's a beta release. Bugs may occur (that's wh
hi!
I would rather say try to avoid committing huge changes before the
beta1 is out. The current tree builds and runs more or less good
(there are still some bugs around but it is acceptable for beta). It
would be bad to have last minute breakages only because of one or two
commits.
Cheers,
On W
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Laruence wrote:
>SessionHandler is not stable now, and remain some bugs need to be
> fixed(one open bug #55690, and test failed)
It's a beta release. Bugs may occur (that's why we have betas!).
Derick
--
http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
Like Xdebug? Consider
Stas Malyshev wrote:
If you have any fixes that must be in the beta
Some of my fixes are still awaiting review :(
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquir
Hi:
SessionHandler is not stable now, and remain some bugs need to be
fixed(one open bug #55690, and test failed)
and arpad can not be connected now, so you may need to double
check with him when you start packaging.
thanks
2011/9/14 Stas Malyshev :
> Hi!
>
> It looks like the situation wi
Hi!
On 9/8/11 12:04 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
I would like to mention this segfault that i am having with 5.4 alpha 3:
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55578
The reproduce case is trivial (thanks to Felipe and Tyrael for improving it
even more)
FWIW, was unable to reproduce it on Darwin with
On 09/08/2011 11:01 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
We've made a great progress on fixing and cleaning up the unit tests, I'd like
to thank everybody involved for their contribution. We still have some failures
and tests with unclear status, so I think it's better we take another week
before w
On 09/08/2011 02:43 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
Christopher Jones wrote:
File a bug and attach test patches that satisfy you (and run on gcov).
Or merge the patches yourself - but I'm not sure you have karma???
I've never heard of anyone else running these tests so your help would
be appreciated.
Christopher Jones wrote:
File a bug and attach test patches that satisfy you (and run on gcov).
Or merge the patches yourself - but I'm not sure you have karma???
I've never heard of anyone else running these tests so your help would
be appreciated. I won't sidetrack this thread with long term c
On 09/08/2011 11:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
Christopher Jones wrote:
For 5.4, there are still are a bunch of systematic failures on gcov
e.g. imap, pdo_firebird, pdo_odbc that need attention, along with less
obvious issues. Volunteers welcome.
I've asked a couple of times now about fixing th
I would like to mention this segfault that i am having with 5.4 alpha 3:
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55578
The reproduce case is trivial (thanks to Felipe and Tyrael for improving it
even more)
greetings,
Benjamin
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:01 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We've made a g
Christopher Jones wrote:
For 5.4, there are still are a bunch of systematic failures on gcov
e.g. imap, pdo_firebird, pdo_odbc that need attention, along with less
obvious issues. Volunteers welcome.
I've asked a couple of times now about fixing the PDO tests, most of the
pdo_firebird failure
On 09/08/2011 11:01 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
We've made a great progress on fixing and cleaning up the unit tests, I'd like
to thank everybody involved for their contribution. We still have some failures
and tests with unclear status, so I think it's better we take another week
before w
Hi!
On 8/28/11 10:55 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I should ask someone with Zend karma to commit the closure rebinding patch.
Context:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closures/object-extension#privateprotected_members_scope
Vote: https://wiki.php.net/todo/php54/vote
Done.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Softwa
Hi Again:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:56:57PM -0400, Daniel Convissor wrote:
>
> http://www.analysisandsolutions.com/php/mysqli.test.failures.tbz
>
> I didn't modify the tests because they're working for other people.
>
> Built 5.4 from svn checkout this afternoon using "--with-mysqli=mysqlnd."
>
Hi:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 10:55:48PM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> http://codepad.org/ZV8imUuc
I see Rasmus is only getting one mysqli failure. I'm getting several.
The diff, out and exp files can be found here:
http://www.analysisandsolutions.com/php/mysqli.test.failures.tbz
I didn't mod
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 10:42 -0400, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> On 2011-08-31, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > I am down to 34 test failures compiling against mysqlnd instead of libmysql
> >
> > http://codepad.org/ZV8imUuc
> >
> > I did have to set MYSQL_TEST_SOCKET=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock in my
On 2011-08-31, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> I am down to 34 test failures compiling against mysqlnd instead of libmysql
>
> http://codepad.org/ZV8imUuc
>
> I did have to set MYSQL_TEST_SOCKET=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock in my
> environment though. It was defaulting to /tmp/mysql.sock
I've noticed this
On Aug 31, 2011 12:14 PM, "Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote:
>
> On 08/30/2011 08:39 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I've checked the unit tests on my Mac and I see 48 failures so far. I've
> > put them here:
> > https://wiki.php.net/todo/tests54?&#tested_2011-08-30_on_mac_os_x
> >
> > Most of them
On 31.08.11 13:32, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> Revert sounds find to me, the change was indeed to fix the test.
Ok. Committed.
JFTR, I also fixed the tests in xsl and libxml. They should pass now (at
least on my machine they do :))
chregu
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Christian Stocker
On Aug 31, 2011, at 5:39 AM, Christian Stocker
wrote:
>
>
> On 31.08.11 09:47, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> For simplexml test (ext/simplexml/tests/bug48601.phpt), it looks like
>> Ilia reverted the fix for bug #48601 with this:
>>
>> http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP
Revert sounds find to me, the change was indeed to fix the test.
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Christian Stocker
wrote:
>
>
> On 31.08.11 12:25, Laruence wrote:
>> Hi:
>> I think you should not commit untill ask ilia for the reason of
>> previous change,
>
> sure, but my guess is he just f
On 31.08.11 12:25, Laruence wrote:
> Hi:
> I think you should not commit untill ask ilia for the reason of
> previous change,
sure, but my guess is he just fixed the code to pass the test, but IMHO
the test was wrong (and my patches fixes that). ilia?
chregu
>
> thanks
>
> 2011/8/31 Chris
Hi:
I think you should not commit untill ask ilia for the reason of
previous change,
thanks
2011/8/31 Christian Stocker :
> Hi
>
> Here's my proposed patch
> https://gist.github.com/1183212
>
> If noone objects, I'll commit it soon
>
> chregu
>
> On 31.08.11 11:39, Christian Stocker wrote:
>>
Hi
Here's my proposed patch
https://gist.github.com/1183212
If noone objects, I'll commit it soon
chregu
On 31.08.11 11:39, Christian Stocker wrote:
>
>
> On 31.08.11 09:47, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> For simplexml test (ext/simplexml/tests/bug48601.phpt), it looks like
>> Ilia reverte
On 31.08.11 09:47, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> For simplexml test (ext/simplexml/tests/bug48601.phpt), it looks like
> Ilia reverted the fix for bug #48601 with this:
>
> http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_4/ext/simplexml/simplexml.c?r1=311870&r2=311874
>
>
> I'm not sure
Hi!
For simplexml test (ext/simplexml/tests/bug48601.phpt), it looks like
Ilia reverted the fix for bug #48601 with this:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_4/ext/simplexml/simplexml.c?r1=311870&r2=311874
I'm not sure what simplexml is supposed to return in each case, the
t
Hi:
it's odd that parse_ini_*.phpt failed in my built environ, but
seems didn't fail in your list.
so maybe my changes is not appropriate?
thanks
2011/8/31 Stas Malyshev :
> Hi!
>
> I've checked the unit tests on my Mac and I see 48 failures so far. I've put
> them here: https://wiki.php
>
> Test strtolower() function [ext/standard/tests/strings/strtolower.phpt]
> Test strtoupper() function [ext/standard/tests/strings/strtoupper1.phpt]
>
> I believe these fail on OSX because we test for undefined ASCII behavior.
We call strtolower/strtoupper for all 256 ASCII characters, but ASCII
Hi!
On 8/30/11 10:55 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
I am down to 34 test failures compiling against mysqlnd instead of libmysql
http://codepad.org/ZV8imUuc
I did have to set MYSQL_TEST_SOCKET=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock in my
environment though. It was defaulting to /tmp/mysql.sock
I'm looking in
I am down to 34 test failures compiling against mysqlnd instead of libmysql
http://codepad.org/ZV8imUuc
I did have to set MYSQL_TEST_SOCKET=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock in my
environment though. It was defaulting to /tmp/mysql.sock
-Rasmus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
Hi!
On 8/30/11 10:23 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Which means, since we can't touch the environment in php_date.c code, we
have to set TZ env variable for the test to pass, and strftime for Mac
is dependent on TZ env and we can't do a thing about it as it seems.
Right, so this is an XFAIL test on
On 08/30/2011 10:08 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 8/30/11 9:53 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> strftime() on Mac seems to ignore timezone arguments in struct tm for
>> some reason and uses environment TZ instead. Not sure how to address
>> that.
>
> Looking into Mac strftime sources, it says
Hi!
On 8/30/11 9:53 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
strftime() on Mac seems to ignore timezone arguments in struct tm for
some reason and uses environment TZ instead. Not sure how to address that.
Looking into Mac strftime sources, it says this:
** C99 says that the UTC offse
Hi!
On 8/30/11 9:13 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Why is your tests/func/005a.phpt failing? That seems to pass
consistently for most people.
tests/lang/045.phpt is the one that fails for everyone because we don't
re-apply the timeout for a registered shutdown function. We should
either fix that or
On 08/30/2011 08:39 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've checked the unit tests on my Mac and I see 48 failures so far. I've
> put them here:
> https://wiki.php.net/todo/tests54?&#tested_2011-08-30_on_mac_os_x
>
> Most of them are mysql, but others too.
> So, is there anybody working or willin
Hi!
On 8/30/11 8:57 PM, Laruence wrote:
Hi:
I run make test yesterday, and seems the result is quite different
anyway, I will check it agian,
PS, it's better if there is the test.diff and the config.log
(like link against libmysql or mysqlnd )
I'm linking against libmysql, ve
Stas:
sorry for missing the info about diff ,
anyway, the http://qa.php.net/reports/ seems down:
"An error occured when reading a DB file."
thanks
2011/8/31 Laruence :
> Hi:
> I run make test yesterday, and seems the result is quite different
>
> anyway, I will check it agian,
>
> P
Hi:
I run make test yesterday, and seems the result is quite different
anyway, I will check it agian,
PS, it's better if there is the test.diff and the config.log
(like link against libmysql or mysqlnd )
thanks
2011/8/31 Stas Malyshev :
> Hi!
>
> I've checked the unit tests on my M
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
If each one of us attacked just one of these over the next couple of
days, we'd be done. At the very least, if we can't come up with a good
fix and there is a good reason for not fixing it before the beta, the
test should be moved to xfail.
I've still not had an answer abo
Sure, and I mentioned that initially. But we at least need to look at
each failing test and make a determination before blindly pushing out a
beta. I have fixed a couple of easily fixable tests in the past couple
of days that anybody who looked at them could have fixed.
-Rasmus
On 08/29/2011 12:4
Unless test failures are critical, it seems worth either commenting out or
converting to xfail ones that can't be immediately fixed.
That gives a 0 fail baseline to work from for detecting regressions, and
test failures should be associated with bug reports anyway so it's not like
they'd get lost
On 08/29/2011 12:23 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 8/28/11 11:06 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> I would really like to see the number of failed tests hit 0 before we
>> even consider a 5.4 beta release. It shouldn't take that long to fix the
>> remaining tests. I'm down to 48 with just about
Hi!
On 8/28/11 11:06 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
I would really like to see the number of failed tests hit 0 before we
even consider a 5.4 beta release. It shouldn't take that long to fix the
remaining tests. I'm down to 48 with just about everything enabled on my
Ubuntu laptop here. They are list
I will look into the 3 failing xsl tests.
chregu
On 29.08.11 08:06, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 08/28/2011 10:34 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> According to our release plan, we are planning to release the 5.4 beta
>> this week on September 1st, which means it'll be packaged on Wednesday
>> Aug 31st.
On 08/28/2011 10:34 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> According to our release plan, we are planning to release the 5.4 beta
> this week on September 1st, which means it'll be packaged on Wednesday
> Aug 31st. If you have any TODO items you want in, please do it before that.
I would really like to see th
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 06:34:21 +0100, Stas Malyshev
wrote:
Hi!
According to our release plan, we are planning to release the 5.4 beta
this week on September 1st, which means it'll be packaged on Wednesday
Aug 31st. If you have any TODO items you want in, please do it before
that.
I s
72 matches
Mail list logo
