Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
Gwynne Raskind wrote: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 19:03, David Soria Parrad...@php.net wrote: Those wanting to use git and git workflows have a disadvantage when we stay with SVN. Choosing a VCS happens from time to time and sometimes your favorit is not the winner. I personally would love to see PHP moving to hg, but if more people like git more, the hg people have to deal with it. Agreed on both counts. It _is_ nice to see that I am not alone in preferring hg ... Sometimes it does seem that I'm in a minority of 1. The RFC points out that there will be modules. We will_not_ copy the current SVN history into one big repo. In fact having everything, pecl, php-src and co in one repository does not make sense. The original plan called for the SVN repo to be split up at some point in the future, but DVCS gained traction and SVN went without any attempts by anyone to put a proper workflow of any kind in place. And I think this is the point. With the right structure in place then it _will_ be easier for cross dvcs working. The current plan calls for all of php-src to be a single repo, with rules for moving extra modules in and out. That is the single repo I am referring to and potentially it will be as unwieldy as the libreoffice setup? It _is_ about time that splitting things up was considered in a little more detail so we can work on every module with the same ease as 'extra' extensions are now currently managed? Even the argument that one needs to see all the history at once has the alternative view that just seeing commits for a single module would be helpful? ( Note Pierre - I'm not using upper case for emphasis - I started text messaging when the printers only had upper case so I'm still learning these newfangled ways :) ) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Array as class member and refcounting
There is something that confuses me. Let there be a class member Foo::$bar, which has to be initialized as an empty array in the constructor. If I do that (via zend_update_property), its refcount is increased (from 1, which it gets after alloc + array_init, to 2). It is obvious why this happens, since from zend_update_property gets a variable from somone in the outside world, and so it is right to ++ it. But in this particular case, the array being initialized in the constructor, it does not need a refcount of 2, 1 is right, since it's used only by the object (yet). So I thought I will Z_DELREF_P() it. And it worked. Until I started valgrind, which was reporting: ==4538== Invalid read of size 4 ==4538==at 0x822D3C6: _zval_ptr_dtor (zend.h:385) ==4538==by 0x823C1FF: _zval_ptr_dtor_wrapper (zend_variables.c:189) ==4538==by 0x824E1A1: zend_hash_destroy (zend_hash.c:529) ==4538==by 0x826655A: zend_object_std_dtor (zend_objects.c:45) ==4538==by 0x8266A28: zend_objects_free_object_storage (zend_objects.c:126) ==4538==by 0x826C43D: zend_objects_store_del_ref_by_handle_ex (zend_objects_API.c:220) ==4538==by 0x826C0AC: zend_objects_store_del_ref (zend_objects_API.c:172) ==4538==by 0x823BD77: _zval_dtor_func (zend_variables.c:52) ==4538==by 0x822B99B: _zval_dtor (zend_variables.h:35) ==4538==by 0x822D463: _zval_ptr_dtor (zend_execute_API.c:443) ==4538==by 0x823C1FF: _zval_ptr_dtor_wrapper (zend_variables.c:189) ==4538==by 0x824E518: zend_hash_apply_deleter (zend_hash.c:614) ==4538== Address 0x44c1718 is 8 bytes inside a block of size 20 free'd So it looks like the ZE really needs the refcount to be 2. All other tests I've written work fine, no memleaks, no segfaults whatsoever. Still I am a little bit confused: WHY does it need it be higher than (from my understanding) it should be? Thanks, Flavius -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released!
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:51 AM, a...@akbkhome.com a...@akbkhome.com wrote: BTW. we could really do with a searchable archive of php.dev + internals... - It's pretty difficult to find out if this was ever discussed before.. Again, it was discussed already and the argument of using instanceof was used to deprecate is_a (along other arguments). I see no point to argue again about that. It was a mistake to change it again in 5.3, Zeev realized the use in this exact case, let move on now. Revert that in 5.3 and do it only in 5.4. -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released!
-Original Message- From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:31 AM To: a...@akbkhome.com Cc: Stas Malyshev; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:51 AM, a...@akbkhome.com a...@akbkhome.com wrote: BTW. we could really do with a searchable archive of php.dev + internals... - It's pretty difficult to find out if this was ever discussed before.. Again, it was discussed already and the argument of using instanceof was used to deprecate is_a (along other arguments). I see no point to argue again about that. It was a mistake to change it again in 5.3, Zeev realized the use in this exact case, let move on now. Revert that in 5.3 and do it only in 5.4. Just so that my position is clear on the matter: - I still think that is_a() is working properly the way it does now, after the change. - I think the code in isError() is wrong, and should be fixed. - Had we (the collective we) known that fixing is_a() would result in such breakage, it would have probably been wise not to fix it in 5.3.x, and wait for 5.4 for this purpose. - Given that we've already done it - I wouldn't revert it. Fix it in PEAR. That's the only way to create something that works across all versions of 5.3.x. Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released!
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:31 AM To: a...@akbkhome.com Cc: Stas Malyshev; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:51 AM, a...@akbkhome.com a...@akbkhome.com wrote: BTW. we could really do with a searchable archive of php.dev + internals... - It's pretty difficult to find out if this was ever discussed before.. Again, it was discussed already and the argument of using instanceof was used to deprecate is_a (along other arguments). I see no point to argue again about that. It was a mistake to change it again in 5.3, Zeev realized the use in this exact case, let move on now. Revert that in 5.3 and do it only in 5.4. Just so that my position is clear on the matter: - I still think that is_a() is working properly the way it does now, after the change. - I think the code in isError() is wrong, and should be fixed. - Had we (the collective we) known that fixing is_a() would result in such breakage, it would have probably been wise not to fix it in 5.3.x, and wait for 5.4 for this purpose. - Given that we've already done it - I wouldn't revert it. Fix it in PEAR. That's the only way to create something that works across all versions of 5.3.x. I won't battle endlessly to get that fixed back again (you will always find smtg else to keep that thing in anyway ;-) but it does confirm what I said earlier about changing behaviors in patch releases. This is something we must deal with much more carefully. And using x.y.0 tests as base is a good start, also the BC breakages are now covered by the RFC, let stick to that for 5.4.x. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released!
On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 08:39 +, Zeev Suraski wrote: - Given that we've already done it - I wouldn't revert it. Fix it in PEAR. That's the only way to create something that works across all versions of 5.3.x. Unfortunately this is the case. johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: On 8/24/11 2:03 PM, David Soria Parra wrote: after 3 weeks of discussion, I think we are ready to start voting on the DVCS RFC. If you think something is missing or should be explained in more detail, let me know. I'm not sure choosing DCVS by vote is actually a good way to go here. I think we need much more input from people that maintain all the infrastructure we're using now and would be doing the move. If we don't have people committed to making it happen majority-based vote is useless IMHO. I agree, and I also think that before people can make a choice they need to have played with all the options. Just picking git because that's what you heard of and what all the fan boys like is *not* the correct way to go. In order to make a choice, and even consider switching away from SVN, something that *works* just fine, you need to know the systems (ie, git and hg). cheers, Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
On 25/08/11 11:15, Derick Rethans wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: On 8/24/11 2:03 PM, David Soria Parra wrote: after 3 weeks of discussion, I think we are ready to start voting on the DVCS RFC. If you think something is missing or should be explained in more detail, let me know. I'm not sure choosing DCVS by vote is actually a good way to go here. I think we need much more input from people that maintain all the infrastructure we're using now and would be doing the move. If we don't have people committed to making it happen majority-based vote is useless IMHO. I agree, and I also think that before people can make a choice they need to have played with all the options. Just picking git because that's what you heard of and what all the fan boys like is *not* the correct way to go. In order to make a choice, and even consider switching away from SVN, something that *works* just fine, you need to know the systems (ie, git and hg). +10. I think a vote is prematured right now. Cheers. -- Ivan Enderlin Developer of Hoa http://hoa.42/ or http://hoa-project.net/ Member of HTML and WebApps Working Group of W3C http://w3.org/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/25/2011 11:28 AM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa wrote: On 25/08/11 11:15, Derick Rethans wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: I agree, and I also think that before people can make a choice they need to have played with all the options. Just picking git because that's what you heard of and what all the fan boys like is *not* the correct way to go. In order to make a choice, and even consider switching away from SVN, something that *works* just fine, you need to know the systems (ie, git and hg). +10. I think a vote is prematured right now. so what do you suggest? We talk about the topic for 3 weeks now, and I think waiting any longer will not make more people familar with HG. So how do you make people take a look at the VCS in question? I'm open for suggestions. People now have 2 weeks to try out PHP by using the mirrors from either git.php.net or hg.php.net and see how their favourite system works. For me it seems most people don't even read the RFC and the recommendation, so I don't expect them to try out the VCS, but I don't have a clue how to change it. Joking: Next time I'll add a survey that you need to complete successfully before being alllowed to vote ;). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOVhfNAAoJEAT0aMuPE7Z1zukP/2IrTehCAE2AU+3CFSwh05NI san2ncCOfk3tdn6zOuc+4rYGWfSfixqjC0Xre7nma8sRb14zRt1kpzB5xA6EL2i9 SgqfPEUcpzPAF5QkoNrnR9FnZfFK/y/QXTRaupdk/ApLg2rdwegG2BzdB5AiofN7 Q1kxTlVBnwlizPH4J/0/H0kzm9/spkRhWkXslVtvkhVy/7yZH7I7R8kd+voy+6bE jmYuI7hS4Jf2/T0OFA9Js2V3sopOwOy7tuutEUqZ30EXjrE0UKFGs9eiGuBJaMF3 MLgvlSa6tcaAD+yJ8tLraJ1awUNl29kPT2QTJZQkgkJ07iKqPjipJu5jYRLQ6qdy kPuec7gUWC4jzrdmCsvtB1fdEGKWiCXspnP0KgGXjVmqreSvZBabiZm0fOEHqHST foqV7weQe/4wZd3n8UxTsk/Pd27OU5uXllkApsy123d7rV0hv9CEPy5WI7nlWsnB +necXTfdUeOFV2Vdgw7mDPXxf5vIC6t/rXiO2UjGd0QUZz9rxnb+JjQ5CAIpgeZz JVqXJH0RbVa7rIcxBctRmvZ/qq9oEQ9C4Du5vCSr8vOW7PKFJUo7QODd9cDbtBsS 0TnX8diqpw1JaXblIKrYmsUANkIiHLpynT3W9SZeCqdUjt8weiF8xAxbJKkA9/Tj ZE87iAbx3L+GfGNJ5ayz =Q5uu -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. Unless there are objections, I will commit this change to PHP_5_4 and trunk on Monday. I will add the method to the documentation as well, of course. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
On 25/08/11 11:37, David Soria Parra wrote: On 08/25/2011 11:28 AM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa wrote: On 25/08/11 11:15, Derick Rethans wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: I agree, and I also think that before people can make a choice they need to have played with all the options. Just picking git because that's what you heard of and what all the fan boys like is *not* the correct way to go. In order to make a choice, and even consider switching away from SVN, something that *works* just fine, you need to know the systems (ie, git and hg). +10. I think a vote is prematured right now. so what do you suggest? We talk about the topic for 3 weeks now, and I think waiting any longer will not make more people familar with HG. So how do you make people take a look at the VCS in question? I'm open for suggestions. I know. It's a difficult choice. But if we change our VCS for a DVCS, we do it for contributors or maintainers? If maintainers are the most concerned people, they should give a try to Hg and Git for a period longer than 2 weeks (2 months seems to be a reasonable period, 1 month with Hg, 1 month with Git). For the moment, the vote is opened to contributors. Maybe it's not a good “target” for the vote. People now have 2 weeks to try out PHP by using the mirrors from either git.php.net or hg.php.net and see how their favourite system works. For me it seems most people don't even read the RFC and the recommendation, so I don't expect them to try out the VCS, but I don't have a clue how to change it. I don't too. I think Git is more complicated than Hg and I regret the way the vote is changing. But, I repeat, I think the target for the vote is not appropriated. Joking: Next time I'll add a survey that you need to complete successfully before being alllowed to vote ;). s/Joking/Todo/ :-) Best regards. -- Ivan Enderlin Developer of Hoa http://hoa.42/ or http://hoa-project.net/ Member of HTML and WebApps Working Group of W3C http://w3.org/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/25/2011 11:56 AM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa wrote: On 25/08/11 11:37, David Soria Parra wrote: On 08/25/2011 11:28 AM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa wrote: On 25/08/11 11:15, Derick Rethans wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote: I agree, and I also think that before people can make a choice they need to have played with all the options. Just picking git because that's what you heard of and what all the fan boys like is *not* the correct way to go. In order to make a choice, and even consider switching away from SVN, something that *works* just fine, you need to know the systems (ie, git and hg). +10. I think a vote is prematured right now. so what do you suggest? We talk about the topic for 3 weeks now, and I think waiting any longer will not make more people familar with HG. So how do you make people take a look at the VCS in question? I'm open for suggestions. I know. It's a difficult choice. But if we change our VCS for a DVCS, we do it for contributors or maintainers? If maintainers are the most concerned people, they should give a try to Hg and Git for a period longer than 2 weeks (2 months seems to be a reasonable period, 1 month with Hg, 1 month with Git). For the moment, the vote is opened to contributors. Maybe it's not a good “target” for the vote. I think we are mostly concerned with contributers, nevertheless, if people like to have more time, I have not problem with extending the voting period to 4 or 6 weeks. You can always change your vote if you find out another VCS is more suitable. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOVhzlAAoJEAT0aMuPE7Z1SB8QAICKk8PB+gVXSoq5c61oV7qy yO4TFBbN8z/8f4KBpk1ai1BYP4VWESSXi9oJl/hZBwXFMZlBoa6a8lMU7wA431yK pUQBhWXCBHfUlVXF4/PBWS6F2pvrRhHZFG/gexANurnPEmQD4idQnjUb98SkuTtQ rA+9O3ON5ybUis8WZ1P23WjxTv6RFwU0EK2QfzhP9PXcDiXxiJhMAcNvUO10htdT JPKabjJsDTCixRCf21UGsatX82rLdhy7NbWmEz0i95qjOYpps6qUqkIn+9bHVOsC YXzBbMwnWRHeiafgf8N431mSEurlP5Oj8W9P+BHatd2YGO3TZVANKzEAeWNdQDMk pnGtpP+XK9M7+OvnyX3/qX08s+g3vt0gCLMrI451lCJ7bq5lV+q6SXopzE5kVkBG WA04TDh/6x1N96ijq12bCLIe+/DtEKsEDLvCFYt7IrGxCzbtepJa27RzYdkw378e vMlHSlOt9h64tBV9Er814STEkr6S00VQLnJOSmQjB9QL/5vZ7HeWQK7kR4OuSaxN OaTBSkU3BHVlO6CPujm3GhchtI0Vf6frREVA+0AdHJmBbQtxijF36xeP2ZFIqPxw tbwI+wScfmD0ZMWtvy1DfL6E0EukElUYqrkdrnjqohRcw85NguUM733rBmfnXPfv 7x1fsSF8iS78jgDRF5SA =BLPg -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. Looks good and as you do the check to avoid internal classes, that's all good :) Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 10:46:21 +0100, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. What about userland classes that extend internal classes? -- Gustavo Lopes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
2011/8/25 Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net: I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. +1 for the feature Unless there are objections, I will commit this change to PHP_5_4 +0 and trunk on Monday. +1 I will add the method to the documentation as well, of course. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 25 August 2011 10:46, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. Unless there are objections, I will commit this change to PHP_5_4 and trunk on Monday. I will add the method to the documentation as well, of course. Wouldn't ReflectionClass::newMockInstance() be a better name? What other use cases exists? -- Richard Quadling Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc @RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 08/25/2011 02:26 PM, Richard Quadling wrote: Wouldn't ReflectionClass::newMockInstance() be a better name? It is not specific to stubbing/mocking. What other use cases exists? ORM and stubbing/mocking should be enough. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:46, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: I have attached a patch to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55490 that implements ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor() to create an object a class without invoking the constructor. To me this feature makes no sense. But if people find use for it and it remains in Reflection, I won't object to it, so +0. As there are certain internal classes that would crash when their constructor is not invoked, this new method of the Reflection API only works for userland-defined classes. I don't believe there should be this artificial distinction. Internal classes should behave like userland ones in every aspect, let's not put additional barriers. If an internal class can't behave well without a constructor call, that should already be fixed/prevented, as it's already possible by extending it. Unless there are objections, I will commit this change to PHP_5_4 and trunk on Monday. I will add the method to the documentation as well, of course. -- Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 08/25/2011 01:46 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: What about userland classes that extend internal classes? Good point. How would I implement such a check? -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 08/25/2011 02:39 PM, Etienne Kneuss wrote: To me this feature makes no sense. But if people find use for it and it remains in Reflection, I won't object to it, so +0. It should only be used for meta programming, of course ;-) If an internal class can't behave well without a constructor call, that should already be fixed/prevented, as it's already possible by extending it. I second that emotion but as long as those internal classes are not fixed I think it makes sense to disallow creating objects of internal classes without invoking their constructor. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Hi 2011/8/25 Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net: Good point. How would I implement such a check? Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier to check all our internal classes for such failures and fix them accordingly with this addition (Fix the dont-crash-without-calling-constructor)? We could do like that of above and cast an exception instead of E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR (as I believe is being cast now) in 5.4. -- regards, Kalle Sommer Nielsen ka...@php.net -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 08/25/2011 02:47 PM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier to check all our internal classes for such failures and fix them accordingly with this addition (Fix the dont-crash-without-calling-constructor)? We could do like that of above and cast an exception instead of E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR (as I believe is being cast now) in 5.4. Makes sense to me. -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 14:43, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: On 08/25/2011 02:39 PM, Etienne Kneuss wrote: To me this feature makes no sense. But if people find use for it and it remains in Reflection, I won't object to it, so +0. It should only be used for meta programming, of course ;-) If an internal class can't behave well without a constructor call, that should already be fixed/prevented, as it's already possible by extending it. I second that emotion but as long as those internal classes are not fixed I think it makes sense to disallow creating objects of internal classes without invoking their constructor. It is already possible to do that currently, with or without this feature, so you're not preventing much abuse by doing that here. As I said, artificial distinction. This feature however alters the necessary checks for missing constructor calls (at least the ones implemented in SPL as of 5.4), as those assume a userland subclass. -- Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: On 08/25/2011 01:46 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: What about userland classes that extend internal classes? Good point. How would I implement such a check? Checking the same thing than what instanceof does Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 14:49, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: On 08/25/2011 02:47 PM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier to check all our internal classes for such failures and fix them accordingly with this addition (Fix the dont-crash-without-calling-constructor)? We could do like that of above and cast an exception instead of E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR (as I believe is being cast now) in 5.4. Makes sense to me. There is already some standardized checks for 5.4 that wrap around the get_constructor handler. But it should/could be standardized at the engine level. And those raise exceptions in case they detect a uncalled constructor. -- Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 14:54, Etienne Kneuss col...@php.net wrote: Hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 14:49, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: On 08/25/2011 02:47 PM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier to check all our internal classes for such failures and fix them accordingly with this addition (Fix the dont-crash-without-calling-constructor)? We could do like that of above and cast an exception instead of E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR (as I believe is being cast now) in 5.4. Makes sense to me. There is already some standardized checks for 5.4 that wrap around the get_constructor handler. In SPL, that is But it should/could be standardized at the engine level. And those raise exceptions in case they detect a uncalled constructor. -- Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:41:27 +0100, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.net wrote: On 08/25/2011 01:46 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: What about userland classes that extend internal classes? Good point. How would I implement such a check? You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. I think you might be able to just check whether ce.create_object is not NULL, because if the internal class doesn't replace create_object, there's no chance of that class of crashes occurring; plus, they're propagated to the subclasses. -- Gustavo Lopes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 08/25/2011 02:54 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. I think you might be able to just check whether ce.create_object is not NULL, because if the internal class doesn't replace create_object, there's no chance of that class of crashes occurring; plus, they're propagated to the subclasses. I updated the patch accordingly. Thanks! -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released!
On 2011-08-25, a...@akbkhome.com a...@akbkhome.com wrote: I'm not sure it's possible to get agreement on if this is a bug or not, you might see a bug, I just see this as a pointless change for consistency that pretty much nobody will ever need or use. Please don't generalize based on your own opinions and use cases. I am a long time PEAR user (and contributor), and I actually agree with the change. The reporter of the issue that started this all is a colleague of mine, Ralph Schindler, and we discussed it in June along with David Zuilke, who had run into similar issues we had (as well as discussed it with others in other projects). It's not an isolated request; there are many who find the current behavior of is_a() (pre-5.3.7) incoherent for modern PHP usage. Basically, in our case, we were building a DI container. To keep the DI container light-weight, you create definitions that utilize string class names. In order to determine what injections need to be made, you need to introspect the class a little -- and this is where is_a() vs is_subclass_of() vs instanceof comes into play. The latter two _require_ an object instance -- which we may not yet be ready to provide (we may be trying to determine what to inject into the constructor). is_a() does _not_ require an object instance... but prior to 5.3.7 was unable to test against inherited behavior. As such, the only fallback is the much more expensive Reflection API. Having is_a() work properly with string class names and checking the inheritance hierarchy is a huge improvement, keeps it semantically consistent with the rest of the language, and provides capabilities is_subclass_of() cannot (as it cannot check against strings). I think I'll leave it as a) no bug was ever reported on the previous behaviour. False -- others in this thread have pointed it out, and I alluded to the report Ralph issued earlier. b) intended design of is_subclass_of was originally to return false on non-object - andrei (1999) http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=17245r2=17272 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=17245r2=17272 c) is_a() was introduced by sebastian (2002) and kept this intended behaviour http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=67102r2=69234 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=67102r2=69234 d) when andrey (2004) proposed the change to accepts strings on is_subclass_of, he deliberately maintained the existing behaviour for is_a() http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=170604r2=171349 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_builtin_functions.c?r1=170604r2=171349 e) is_a() has a valid use case , and is currently reasonably commonly used. d) the new behaviour is an uncommon use case, and can be done very easily in other ways. BTW. we could really do with a searchable archive of php.dev + internals... - It's pretty difficult to find out if this was ever discussed before.. Regards Alan On Thursday, August 25, 2011 09:10 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: Hi! On 8/24/11 4:38 PM, Alan Knowles wrote: Some real history for the young ones ;) I wonder who you are meaning... :) So the previous behavior was very likely the 'designed' behavior. Not an accidental side effect, or bug. Bugs can be very well intentional, but if they use the language wrong way they are bugs. It's use case is reasonably common when doing tests on mixed returns (method returns PEAR:error, object or normal value.) That's when you use instanceof. So we had a situation where a reasonable number of people (eg. anyone who had used PEAR), had seen and expected the previous behavior. Seeing wrong code somewhere doesn't mean it's not wrong. There's a reason we have the manual. Please do not fix something that is not broken, and breaks real working code, just for the hell of it, even in 5.4. is_a() was broken - it was returning different results from essentially the same function is_subclass_of() for no reason at all (no, somebody writing buggy code in PEAR using undocumented parameter types is not a reason). The reason why we kept is_a() and not killed it in favor of instanceof was to have it work with string arguments, since instanceof does not. Thus, string arguments should be handled properly. I can see how it can be argued that 5.3 is mature enough so such changes shouldn't be there, however correct in theory. For 5.4, I see no base for argument here. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Project Lead| matt...@zend.com Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Thanks for working on this Sebastian, its really appreciated! +1 from me! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.netwrote: On 08/25/2011 02:54 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. I think you might be able to just check whether ce.create_object is not NULL, because if the internal class doesn't replace create_object, there's no chance of that class of crashes occurring; plus, they're propagated to the subclasses. I updated the patch accordingly. Thanks! -- Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
Sebastian, This is a hidden gem for us! =D Thanks a lot for putting your effort into this. Cheers, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Benjamin Eberlei kont...@beberlei.de wrote: Thanks for working on this Sebastian, its really appreciated! +1 from me! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Sebastian Bergmann sebast...@php.netwrote: On 08/25/2011 02:54 PM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. I think you might be able to just check whether ce.create_object is not NULL, because if the internal class doesn't replace create_object, there's no chance of that class of crashes occurring; plus, they're propagated to the subclasses. I updated the patch accordingly. Thanks! -- Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Guilherme Blanco Mobile: +55 (11) 8118-4422 MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com São Paulo - SP/Brazil -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
I'm not familiar enough with Mercurial to properly vote, but am guessing we'll move to Git. Git is popular because Github is popular, and Github is popular because it's awesome. But I think we should skip git.php.net and mirrors/bridges, and simply move to Github. And this means people who maintain Git for a living would maintain it, while we can focus on developing PHP. Regards, Philip -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
2011/8/25 Gustavo Lopes glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt: You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. Checking only the topmost should be enough if traversing the whole inheritance could be avoided. I think you might be able to just check whether ce.create_object is not NULL, because if the internal class doesn't replace create_object, there's no chance of that class of crashes occurring; plus, they're propagated to the subclasses. -- Gustavo Lopes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] ReflectionClass::newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
2011/8/25 Patrick ALLAERT patrickalla...@php.net: 2011/8/25 Gustavo Lopes glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt: You could fetch the parent and do the same check, and so on. Checking only the topmost should be enough if traversing the whole inheritance could be avoided. Well, of course I highly second the opinion that not making distinction and fixing possible bugs in internal classes is a much better approach. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
2011/8/24 David Soria Parra d...@php.net: Hi Internals,, after 3 weeks of discussion, I think we are ready to start voting on the DVCS RFC. If you think something is missing or should be explained in more detail, let me know. I won't transfer the discussion over here but; I don't want to move to a new system we we did it just a few years ago, as Rasmus said long before we moved was that we want to find a solid system that could hold out just as long as the old setup. I don't have a problem by using SVN, nor merge as we have been good at keeping files in sync so its easy to merge patches, much easier than the old unicode-trunk. That being said; I agree with Stas that having a vote is not a good way to actually make a choice here, but it gives a hint of those that voted, as I'm sure that there are many more actively working on the project like PEAR. PECL and Doc guys thats not gonna vote because they don't follow Internals. But -1 from me. -- regards, Kalle Sommer Nielsen ka...@php.net -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
If we do decide to make a VCS change the vote should be fairly one sided for option of choice as this has a fairly broad impact on our development process. On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:03 PM, David Soria Parra d...@php.net wrote: Hi Internals,, after 3 weeks of discussion, I think we are ready to start voting on the DVCS RFC. If you think something is missing or should be explained in more detail, let me know. Votes can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dvcs/vote The RFC can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dvcs Voting will be opened for 2 weeks and end on Sept. 7 at 12 pm. - David -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Failing Autotests / Bugs
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:26 PM, marius adrian popa map...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote: On 08/23/2011 09:45 AM, Daniel Convissor wrote: Hi: On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 03:08:09PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: FAIL DateTime::diff() days -- spring type2 type2 [ext/date/tests/DateTime_days-spring-type2- These tests have been fixed. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Thanks Dan. Could we all bookmark http://gcov.php.net/viewer.php?version=PHP_5_4func=tests I will bookmark and check firebird_pdo related bugs gcov seems to be down at the moment http://gcov.php.net/viewer.php?version=PHP_5_4func=tests -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- zval *aa; MAKE_STD_ZVAL(aa); array_init(aa); add_assoc_string(aa, test, test value, 1); but how do I transverse an associative array of values in a for loop simular to using foreach in PHP ? Hope this is not too OT for this list, but I could not find a better place to ask the question. I have looked through the API SVN sources and this seems like a possible blind spot. Many thanks in advance, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- zval *aa; MAKE_STD_ZVAL(aa); array_init(aa); Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- zval *aa; MAKE_STD_ZVAL(aa); array_init(aa); add_assoc_string(aa, test, test value, 1); add_assoc_string(aa, test2, test value2, 1); but how do I transverse an associative array of values in a for loop simular to using foreach in PHP ? Hope this is not too OT for this list, but I could not find a better place to ask the question. I have looked through the API SVN sources and this seems like a possible blind spot. Many thanks in advance, Aaron but how do I transverse an associative array of values in a for loop simular to using foreach in PHP ? Hope this is not too OT for this list, but I could not find a better place to ask the question. I have looked through the API SVN sources and this seems like a possible blind spot. Many thanks in advance, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP
On 08/26/2011 04:12 AM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: 2011/8/24 David Soria Parra d...@php.net: Hi Internals,, after 3 weeks of discussion, I think we are ready to start voting on the DVCS RFC. If you think something is missing or should be explained in more detail, let me know. I won't transfer the discussion over here but; I don't want to move to a new system we we did it just a few years ago, as Rasmus said long before we moved was that we want to find a solid system that could hold out just as long as the old setup. I don't have a problem by using SVN, nor merge as we have been good at keeping files in sync so its easy to merge patches, much easier than the old unicode-trunk. That being said; I agree with Stas that having a vote is not a good way to actually make a choice here, but it gives a hint of those that voted, as I'm sure that there are many more actively working on the project like PEAR. PECL and Doc guys thats not gonna vote because they don't follow Internals. But -1 from me. FWIW, PEAR is already moving to GitHub. David -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Hello, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- Most everything you need to know about manipulating arrays can be found in ext/standard/array.c -Chris -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Chris Stockton chrisstockto...@gmail.com wrote in message news:calkfbxvsuq-zqyytdxi3a9tccieh6xzz9y-kbyqva8kpc4-...@mail.gmail.com... Hello, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- Most everything you need to know about manipulating arrays can be found in ext/standard/array.c Where's that in the SVN source tree ? Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
On 08/25/2011 05:16 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Chris Stockton chrisstockto...@gmail.com wrote in message news:calkfbxvsuq-zqyytdxi3a9tccieh6xzz9y-kbyqva8kpc4-...@mail.gmail.com... Hello, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- Most everything you need to know about manipulating arrays can be found in ext/standard/array.c Where's that in the SVN source tree ? Aaron http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_4/ext/standard/ Chris -- Email: christopher.jo...@oracle.com Tel: +1 650 506 8630 Blog: http://blogs.oracle.com/opal/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a1.a0.22704.0d5e6...@pb1.pair.com... Chris Stockton chrisstockto...@gmail.com wrote in message news:calkfbxvsuq-zqyytdxi3a9tccieh6xzz9y-kbyqva8kpc4-...@mail.gmail.com... Hello, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- Most everything you need to know about manipulating arrays can be found in ext/standard/array.c Where's that in the SVN source tree ? Ah, got it many thanks, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Christopher Jones christopher.jo...@oracle.com wrote in message news:4e56e662.90...@oracle.com... On 08/25/2011 05:16 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Chris Stockton chrisstockto...@gmail.com wrote in message news:calkfbxvsuq-zqyytdxi3a9tccieh6xzz9y-kbyqva8kpc4-...@mail.gmail.com... Hello, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am working on a C extension module for PHP and am wondering about an API issue. I can see how to add to an associative array :- Most everything you need to know about manipulating arrays can be found in ext/standard/array.c Where's that in the SVN source tree ? Aaron http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_4/ext/standard/ Chris, How much can I access as a PHP plugin dll or shared object ? Thinking about it what I really want to do is see if a key exists in an array and get its type to see if it is BOOL and that it is TRUE. Many thanks, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Hi! On 8/25/11 5:52 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Thinking about it what I really want to do is see if a key exists in an array and get its type to see if it is BOOL and that it is TRUE. For this, you will need to call zend_hash_find (or zend_symtable_find if there's a possibility of keys like 0 that have to be treated as 0). If you get SUCCESS, the key exists and you'll be getting zval **, then either check it's type and value with Z_TYPE_PP and Z_LVAL_PP or call zend_is_true(*val) to get generic truth value (like if(), etc. do). -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] is_a() consequences.....
I've committed the fixes for my two of my packages to support this change..
Who ever thinks this is such a great idea, could you kindly file bugs
against all the packages below to request they fix their 'bugs' or
verify the input
http://pear.php.net/bugs/
Since the behaviour of is_a() is now is_a(mixed, string), if any of the
first arguments is a string that matches the class name, or it's parent
or causes the autoloader to load a class such a class it will produce
unpredicatable results now.
This is not a full list, as I only have a partial copy of all pear packages.
Date/Span.php:182:if (is_a($time, 'date_span')) {
Date/Span.php:184:} elseif (is_a($time, 'date') and
is_a($format, 'date')) {
Date/Span.php:536:if (!is_a($date1, 'date') or !is_a($date2,
'date')) {
Date/Span.php:571:if (is_a($time, 'date_span')) {
Date.php:204:} elseif (is_a($date, 'Date')) {
Date.php:552:if(is_a($tz, 'Date_Timezone')) {
Date.php:746:if (!is_a($span, 'Date_Span')) {
Date.php:821:if (!is_a($span, 'Date_Span')) {
DB/common.php:1252:if (is_a($result, 'DB_result')) {
DB/mysqli.php:996:if (!is_a($id, 'mysqli_result')) {
DB.php:594:return is_a($value, 'DB_Error');
HTTP/Request.php:692:if (!is_a($this-_url, 'Net_URL')) {
HTTP/Request.php:1078:if (!is_a($listener,
'HTTP_Request_Listener')) {
HTTP/Request.php:1095:if (!is_a($listener,
'HTTP_Request_Listener') ||
I18Nv2/DecoratedList.php:51:if (is_a($list, 'I18Nv2_CommonList') ||
I18Nv2/DecoratedList.php:52:is_a($list,
'I18Nv2_DecoratedList')) {
Image/Graph.php:161:} elseif (is_a($params, 'Image_Canvas')) {
Image/Graph.php:211:if (!is_a($this-_canvas, 'Image_Canvas')) {
Image/Graph.php:595:if (!(is_a($part1, 'Image_Graph_Element'))) {
Image/Graph.php:599:if (!(is_a($part2, 'Image_Graph_Element'))) {
Image/Graph/Title.php:154:if (is_a($this-_parent,
'Image_Graph_Plotarea')) {
Image/Graph/Title.php:161:} elseif (!is_a($this-_parent,
'Image_Graph_Layout')) {
Image/Graph/Plot.php:119:if (!is_a($dataset,
'Image_Graph_Dataset')) {
Image/Graph/Plot.php:123:if (!is_a($dataset[$key],
'Image_Graph_Dataset')) {
Image/Graph/Plot.php:756:if (is_a($this-_fillStyle,
'Image_Graph_Fill')) {
Image/Graph/Common.php:49:return is_a(get_parent_class($object),
$class_name);
Image/Graph/Common.php:180:} elseif (is_a($this-_parent,
'Image_Graph_Common')) {
Image/Graph/Common.php:200:if (!is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Font')) {
Image/Graph/Common.php:295:if (($this-_canvas == null) ||
(!is_a($this-_canvas, 'Image_Canvas'))) {
Image/Graph/Marker/Average.php:65:(is_a($this-_parent,
'Image_Graph_Plot')))
Image/Graph/Marker/Array.php:71:if (is_a($marker,
'Image_Graph_Element')) {
Image/Graph/Marker.php:105:if (is_a($this-_secondaryMarker,
'Image_Graph_Marker')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:99:if (is_a($plotarea,
'Image_Graph_Plotarea')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:103:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:162:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:194:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:259:if (is_a($plotarea,
'Image_Graph_Plotarea')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:332:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:348:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Legend.php:371:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Line/Array.php:74:if (is_a($style,
'Image_Graph_Element')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:221:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:225:} elseif (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Grid')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:252:} elseif (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Axis')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:334:if (is_a($dataset,
'Image_Graph_Dataset')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:624:if (is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot')) {
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:625:if (((is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_Bar')) ||
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:626:(is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_Step')) ||
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:627:(is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_Dot')) ||
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:628:(is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_CandleStick')) ||
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:629:(is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_BoxWhisker')) ||
Image/Graph/Plotarea.php:630:(is_a($element,
'Image_Graph_Plot_Impulse')))
Image/Graph/Layout/Horizontal.php:94:if (!is_a($part1,
'Image_Graph_Layout')) {
Image/Graph/Layout/Horizontal.php:99:} elseif
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Hi Stas, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote in message news:4e56f0d6.20...@sugarcrm.com... Hi! On 8/25/11 5:52 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Thinking about it what I really want to do is see if a key exists in an array and get its type to see if it is BOOL and that it is TRUE. For this, you will need to call zend_hash_find (or zend_symtable_find if there's a possibility of keys like 0 that have to be treated as 0). Okay, found it, zend_hash.h, so that should be accessable to my module :) If you get SUCCESS, the key exists and you'll be getting zval **, then either check it's type and value with Z_TYPE_PP and Z_LVAL_PP or call zend_is_true(*val) to get generic truth value (like if(), etc. do). Great. That seems alot simpler. Many thanks, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
hi every api has lots of 'samples' ,that are the standard extensions in src/ext/* :) Thanks Sent from my iPhone 在 2011-8-26，11:20，Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com 写道： Hi Stas, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote in message news:4e56f0d6.20...@sugarcrm.com... Hi! On 8/25/11 5:52 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Thinking about it what I really want to do is see if a key exists in an array and get its type to see if it is BOOL and that it is TRUE. For this, you will need to call zend_hash_find (or zend_symtable_find if there's a possibility of keys like 0 that have to be treated as 0). Okay, found it, zend_hash.h, so that should be accessable to my module :) If you get SUCCESS, the key exists and you'll be getting zval **, then either check it's type and value with Z_TYPE_PP and Z_LVAL_PP or call zend_is_true(*val) to get generic truth value (like if(), etc. do). Great. That seems alot simpler. Many thanks, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] transversing associative arrays from C
Thanks ! Xinchen Hui larue...@gmail.com wrote in message news:7256329410255948429@unknownmsgid... hi every api has lots of 'samples' ,that are the standard extensions in src/ext/* :) Thanks Sent from my iPhone 在 2011-8-26，11:20，Aaron Gray ang.use...@gmail.com 写道： Hi Stas, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote in message news:4e56f0d6.20...@sugarcrm.com... Hi! On 8/25/11 5:52 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Thinking about it what I really want to do is see if a key exists in an array and get its type to see if it is BOOL and that it is TRUE. For this, you will need to call zend_hash_find (or zend_symtable_find if there's a possibility of keys like 0 that have to be treated as 0). Okay, found it, zend_hash.h, so that should be accessable to my module :) If you get SUCCESS, the key exists and you'll be getting zval **, then either check it's type and value with Z_TYPE_PP and Z_LVAL_PP or call zend_is_true(*val) to get generic truth value (like if(), etc. do). Great. That seems alot simpler. Many thanks, Aaron -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
