..snip
>
> Robert ... The main problem with the PHP5.3/4 changes are that the attitude
> with PHP5.3 was 'you don't have to worry', but very quickly that became 'now
> you do' simply by the switch of the default on e_strict. Perhaps when every
> existing project is totally e_strict complaint things
Guillaume Rossolini wrote:
To go back to Lester's original question, I decided to forgo PHP4
completely a few years ago, and fully take the PHP5 route. I do not use any
framework or library that advertises it still works on PHP4.
Thanks for the comments Guillaume ... it's nice to here that I am
On Aug 25, 2012, at 17:24, "Guillaume Rossolini" wrote:
> What you say is true, versions get old. But as Lester pointed out, they
> work. that is why some computer systems that have been outdated for years
> are still functioning today. It is hard to make a case for rewriting code
> that already
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Thomas Hruska wrote:
> Good businesses plan ahead and integrate upgrade expenditures into their
> cost models.
... And they also tend to avoid unnecessary costs at all costs, and that of
course means they don't upgrade unless a) absolutely necessary or b) th
On 8/25/2012 9:11 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
Andrew Faulds wrote:
Personally I have to live with real life, and just want to help
change that
situation.
Me too. My code relies on out-of-date extensions and PHP features,
which is why
I'm *refactoring* and *rewriting* the parts which do.
Exactly w
On 08/25/2012 10:07 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>> Andrew Faulds wrote:
> >>>Personally I have to live with real life, and just want to help
> >>>change that
> >>>situation.
>>Me too. My code relies on out-of-date extensions and PHP features,
>>which is wh
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Andrew Faulds wrote:
>>>Personally I have to live with real life, and just want to help
>>>change that
>>>situation.
>>Me too. My code relies on out-of-date extensions and PHP features,
>>which is why
>>I'm*refactoring* and*rewriting* the parts which do.
>
>Exactly what
On 08/25/2012 09:11 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Andrew Faulds wrote:
>>> Personally I have to live with real life, and just want to help
>>> change that
>>> situation.
>> Me too. My code relies on out-of-date extensions and PHP features,
>> which is why
>> I'm *refactoring* and *rewriting* the parts
Andrew Faulds wrote:
Personally I have to live with real life, and just want to help change that
situation.
Me too. My code relies on out-of-date extensions and PHP features, which is why
I'm *refactoring* and *rewriting* the parts which do.
Exactly what I've been doing for the last year ... I
On 25/08/12 14:44, Lester Caine wrote:
Andrew Faulds wrote:
ISPs should have moved to 5.3 long ago. If they haven't, that isn't
our problem.
I'll just refer you to
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/pl-php/5/all
5.3 is NOT being used because of the changes it introduced, and
distributions
Andrew Faulds wrote:
ISPs should have moved to 5.3 long ago. If they haven't, that isn't our problem.
I'll just refer you to
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/pl-php/5/all
5.3 is NOT being used because of the changes it introduced, and distributions do
NOT yet include 5.4 as the norm
Pers
On 25/08/12 14:27, Lester Caine wrote:
Andrew Faulds wrote:
OK Lester, you've whined enough, what do you want us to do? Freeze
development
for 5 years so ISPs can slowly catch up, or something?
Simply taking care to provide fixed point that we can work to would
have helped. LTS versions have
Andrew Faulds wrote:
OK Lester, you've whined enough, what do you want us to do? Freeze development
for 5 years so ISPs can slowly catch up, or something?
Simply taking care to provide fixed point that we can work to would have helped.
LTS versions have been rejected in the past, but PLEASE ca
On 25.08.2012, at 11:15, Lester Caine wrote:
> Many of my 'problems' with all of the 'progress' being made with PHP are
> caused because I'm using a core framework who's origins go back to PHP4 days.
I'm sorry, but what is the point of this email? This is a mailing list, not a
group therapy se
On 25/08/12 13:08, Lester Caine wrote:
Marco Pivetta wrote:
Just wanted to remind you that the latest Smarty 2.x version is
2.6.26, released
in the middle of 2009...
And our own version of Smarty2 has been maintained and updated several
times in the intervening period. It's a lot easier to fix
Marco Pivetta wrote:
Just wanted to remind you that the latest Smarty 2.x version is 2.6.26, released
in the middle of 2009...
And our own version of Smarty2 has been maintained and updated several times in
the intervening period. It's a lot easier to fix security holes as they are
identified t
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
So what do you propose?
There always will be people who don't want any new fearure or improvement but
their code workinf forever without any investment(refactoring) on their part.
We shouldn't stop the development for that alone.
If I were them, I would pick an enterprise dis
Heya,
Just wanted to remind you that the latest Smarty 2.x version is 2.6.26,
released in the middle of 2009...
3 years have passed by, and change is something that cannot really be
stopped. You can either freeze the environment and plan to re-build your
projects or maintain them, applying change a
2012.08.25. 11:16, "Lester Caine" ezt írta:
>
> Many of my 'problems' with all of the 'progress' being made with PHP are
caused because I'm using a core framework who's origins go back to PHP4
days. Many of the facilities are currently unusable simply because they
have not had any of the PHP5.2/3/
19 matches
Mail list logo
