On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Philipp Wagner wrote:
> Steph Fox wrote:
> > Hi Lester,
> >
> >> And there are no problems with those on foreign keyboards?
> >
> > If there are, those foreign keyboards are unable to offer either escaped
> > chars or MS paths... which seems highly unlikely.
>
> Well, on Ge
Hi,
Guys, this is like junior school in here.
Let me put some things in perspective:
1) The location of backslash on foreign keyboard is entirely irrelevant for
the choice of namespace separator. Why? You already use this *every day* to
escape characters in your strings and regular expressio
The N word discussion looks neverending...
solution #3 from Gregory solves the ambiguity so I dont see how it will
"create such nightmares in big projects with ambigous identifiers". I'm
using the :: operator for the last 6 months and I had no such issues even
without the fix (I'm not naming classe
2008/10/21 Stan Vassilev | FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi,
>
> Guys, this is like junior school in here.
>
> Let me put some things in perspective:
>
> 1) The location of backslash on foreign keyboard is entirely irrelevant for
> the choice of namespace separator. Why? You already use this *every d
Hi,
Guys, this is like junior school in here.
Yep.
Let me put some things in perspective:
No, let me. Greg worked his butt off the entire weekend looking for the
flaws in *all* the options available to us, including a couple of new ones
that never even reached the list before he rejected
>
> Clarity and simplicity are the two chief requisites. We're all fully
> aware
> of that, from Engine developer to n00b, so there's really no point in
> discussing it to death on-list at this stage.
>
Yep. I agree. I'm already tired of watching this thread. Let them agree
on an implementation
Steph Fox wrote:
What we're hearing here about European keyboard layouts is useful info
because it gives some idea of how popular/unpopular the backslash would
be as a solution and why, but it shouldn't carry as much weight as the
accessibility argument against the triple colon. One is liveable
Steph Fox wrote:
Have we reached a consensus? Or is this still a little open ended?
Scott's trying to pull together a developer-only meeting so we can look
at what's left in a bit more depth. Once we've done this it'll probably
come back to the list (should, IMHO).
Timezones, timezones!
> The "main" branch? PHP_5_X are the "stable" branches, "HEAD" is the
> development branch (at least in theory ...) So stuff is added to HEAD
> and merged bacxk when it's stable enough and need (and somebody cares)
>
> +1 from me, though...
>
> johannes
Now, if we could work the phrase "namespaces
hi,
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Steve Hanselman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The "main" branch? PHP_5_X are the "stable" branches, "HEAD" is the
>> development branch (at least in theory ...) So stuff is added to HEAD
>> and merged bacxk when it's stable enough and need (and somebody cares)
I've been wondering, is such a thing even possible? Is there a good way
to implement an object destruct order? Here are my thoughts:
In the class definition, specify what "level" of destruction the objects
should be on. How, I have no idea, I haven't thought of a good syntax.
It should be an i
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Ryan Panning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been wondering, is such a thing even possible? Is there a good way to
> implement an object destruct order? Here are my thoughts:
>
> In the class definition, specify what "level" of destruction the objects
> should be
12 matches
Mail list logo
