On 07/03/12 00:04, Adam Jon Richardson wrote:
It would be the responsibility of the framework or CMS or application
to protect against this type of attack (which they do quite well.)
When you can force a plugin to work through your API, you can take
appropriate measures. When the plugin can
El 07/03/12 00:15, Kris Craig wrote:
To clarify again, I was under the mistaken impression that ?=
was a new
alias for short_open_tag. My argument was (and still is) against
short_open_tag. I do see some use in this new echo alias for
templating
purposes.
On 06/03/12 14:04, Adam Jon Richardson wrote:
The sandbox I'm considering would only impact the ability to directly call
internal functions. The idea rests on the hope that the framework or CMS
provides a security model that protects the integrity of their own
environment. The framework can
On 06/03/12 17:08, Alan Knowles wrote:
I just got caught on a production server with the 5.4 upgrade on
debian, pretty much everything works fine, except the E_ALL change.
I have to admit I missed the discussion where it was added, and
searching for E_ALL or E_STRICT on marc is pretty
On 06/03/12 19:36, Kris Craig wrote:
nitpicking mode=on
FIRST:
do NOT top post after get a reply below your text
or how do you imagine that anybody can follow a
thread where answers randomly before and after
the quotet text?
Sorry. Sometimes I forget that there are some people out there
On 06/03/12 15:45, Michael Morris wrote:
I have made a wiki account with user name MichaelMorris - I don't
think I have permissions to submit an RFC as of yet. I'll post this
here for now. I've brought this up before, but can now simplify the
original proposal since the decision to always
On 06/03/12 23:08, Michael Morris wrote:
2012/3/6 Ángel González keis...@gmail.com:
Tagless files interpreted as php is the wrong way to go.
I think you should instead propose it as:
* A file included in that mode MUST begin with ?php.
* ? is forbidden in such mode unless followed by EOF
On 02/03/12 02:56, Philip Olson wrote:
Hello!
Please clarify whether or not get_magic_quotes_gpc() and
get_magic_quotes_runtime()
are deprecated, because I do not think they are. Deprecated means people
should not
use them while writing new code, but they are perfectly sensible
On 02/03/12 01:00, Simon Schick wrote:
Hi, all
When will the documentation be ready?
For example you wrote that something has changed to the keywords *continue
*and
*break *- but I dont get what and it's not defined in here:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/control-structures.continue.php
On 27/02/12 16:12, Richard Lynch wrote:
Oh, and string is a reserved word, so this won't work as-is, though
that's obviously picuyane.
It's not, you can perfectly define your own class called 'string'. I'd
be much easier if it were, though.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
On 27/02/12 01:33, Kris Craig wrote:
Exactly, hence why I'm still on the fence with that. I was hoping for some
further discussion though to see if anyone can think of a way around that,
though admittedly nothing comes to my mind.
--Kris
That's why I mentioned the possibility of having such
On 27/02/12 02:44, John Crenshaw wrote:
If we can agree on some basic terminology I think it would move things
forward considerably. I propose these terms:
- Strict Typing means the super strict old C style typing that has been
proven to be ridiculous in this environment because of the
On 27/02/12 17:19, Richard Lynch wrote:
PRESUMPTION:
*ANY* strict datatype could also be NULL, to represent a failure
condition...
Otherwise, when you are out of RAM:
strict $o = new Object(); //violates strict, because Object HAS to be
NULL, as there is no RAM left for it to be an object.
On 27/02/12 16:47, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
2012/2/27 Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de
Hi,
PHP is no strickt-typed language. Changing this is a massive change, if
you want to go there: There are plenty of other languages.
If you want this to be an optional feature:
a) It's not
On 27/02/12 20:05, Richard Lynch wrote:
You are correct.
I'd have to come up with some OTHER scenario not involving fatal
error, such as:
strict $db = new DB();
and your database being down, unavailable, or connection parameters
being wrong.
The principle remains.
You probably still
On 27/02/12 19:22, Richard Lynch wrote:
I'm not so sure about that. In a well-written web application, you
would
typically convert them on the first layer, when receiving from the
web.
On next usages, your int variables are usually ints already.
Afraid not.
It turns out that PHP, on 32-bit
On 27/02/12 22:52, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
Ferenc,
Thanks for the comments!
Thanks from me, too.
And thanks to you, Anthony if you get to summarise that.
There were ideas, but they didn't have enough traction.
IMO we can't have a proper solution without changing the existing behavior
for
Kris, go out for a walk. We don't need fake
stress after the real one :)
Yes, it's midnight here, but who cares?
That you are afraid of going out at night? Because
you had a bad experience with a serial killer?
Oh, well...
PS: This is what I called 'sane weak typing' in the other
thread before
On 26/02/12 15:57, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
I've gone back and re-read a bunch of the old posts on Type Hinting,
and have come to the conclusion that it won't be done any time soon.
Not because it doesn't have merit, but because there are at least a
few fundamental difficulties that are
On 26/02/12 05:11, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
Kris Craig
I usually just read the list, sometimes add if I have something to say and
I had voiced my opinion on typehinting before. And you know, just from the
stand of a userland developer who has 7-8 years of experience and devoting
myself to the
I just realised that if it were going to add magic casting, it could as well
be done with a spl_autocast_register(), so that you could either cast things
when they match, throw an exception, etc. (there should be some default
value dynamic typing, so the perfomance wouldn't hurt) .
I don't think
On 24/02/12 00:36, Kris Craig wrote:
Hmm that's a fascinating idea! So, and please correct me if I'm
wrong, you're saying that it might be a better approach to determine
strict vs. dynamic typing on a per file or function basis instead of
on a per stack basis? In other words, blah.php could
On 24/02/12 17:46, Dmitri Snytkine wrote:
In order to intoduce the enum into php, 'enum' will have to be a keyword like
'class', 'interface', etc.
Just a thought, but could there be a problem with using the new keyword
'enum' in php. I don't think it's currently a reserved word, so it
On 24/02/12 19:35, Kris Craig wrote:
Could you elaborate on that a little? I.e. as an interface for the
call. I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you could provide a
quick example, that would be awesome! =)
--Kris
Hi Kris,
You're right it wasn't clearly expresseded. Lets see if I can
On 23/02/12 00:09, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Sidenote, according your examples above on how you want call
functions: Considered using normal constants?
How can I do type hinting with them?
You should not. PHP is not a strictly typed language, so if you want
strictly typed function you'll
I don't see your point, Sebastian.
And
| $studipNamedVariable = Databases::Mysql;
| // ... much code
| database_select($stupidNamedVariable, $sql);
is better? The problem here seems to be more the developer, that
avoids the use of constants, then less the missing enums.
You can obviously
On 23/02/12 22:59, Kris Craig wrote:
Could you elaborate on this? So long as that setting cannot be changed
midway through a script or its includes (i.e. the stack must be all
strict or all dynamic), I can't think of any reason why that would not
be feasible.
--Kris
I'm afraid that would
On 23/02/12 23:49, Kris Craig wrote:
Yeah I agree, that was one of the things I listed under
disadvantages lol.
I guess my question is: Does this constitute a prohibitive problem,
or is it something that we can stomach?
I mean, if you think about it, that's really what we're talking about
On 22/02/12 09:37, Sebastian Krebs wrote:
class MyEnum {
const FOO = 'foo';
const BAR = 'bar';
private $value;
public function __construct ($value) {
if (!in_array($value, array(self::FOO, self::BAR)) throw new
UnexpectedValueException;
$this-value = $value;
On 22/02/12 15:57, Michael Morris wrote:
Before writing up a full RFC I want to put out a feeler on something.
Currently we have several input parameter objects, chief among them
$_GET, $_POST, $_REQUEST, $_SERVER (for the client HTTP headers). All
of them are arrays and legacy code sometimes
Am 22.02.2012 22:30, schrieb Sebastian Krebs:
Am 22.02.2012 22:22, schrieb Ángel González:
I want to call it doSomething(FOO) or doSomething(MyEnum::FOO),
not doSomething(new MyEnum(MyEnum::FOO));
// The class file
class MyEnum {
public static $FOO;
public static $BAR
On 22/02/12 23:13, Kris Craig wrote:
While I'm a huge fan of Github, why did you decide to host your RFC there
instead of on the PHP wiki? (...)
Samuel doesn't have a wiki accout.
I agree he should get one and continue the proposal there.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
On 21/02/12 15:54, Bostjan Skufca wrote:
Hi all,
we've bumped into a possible bug where file_get_contents() returns empty
string if we try to get contents from HTTPS source. This error only occurs
if PHP is compiled with --with-curlwrappers.
Funny thing is this only happens on slackware
On 21/02/12 17:06, Ralf Lang wrote:
Am 21.02.2012 16:55, schrieb Martin Amps:
Could you not implement such functionality within your class as follows:
class Family {
public function getMother() {
if ($this-hasMother())
return $someObj;
else
On 21/02/12 19:03, Ralf Lang wrote:
I see no reason why it would be not desirable to have PHP raise the
exception rather than putting more or less repeating code snippets all
around the place. That is why I am asking.
You must be returning false/null somewhere. It's the same effort to
On 13/02/12 21:48, Adi Mutu wrote:
Hello,
Perhaps this is a stupid question, but i haven't coded in C in years and i'm
not very familiar with development/debugging tools. If I have a php script
say 20 lines,
How can I see a path of the corresponding C code which is executed? What If i
On 13/02/12 22:11, Jakov Sosic wrote:
On 02/13/2012 06:10 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
yes, but the more important is the status code so that search
engines do not index you broken page, apache SHOULD NOT provide
his own error-page because you can also send 500 status code
within your script
On 02/07/12 14:18, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 07.02.2012 13:39, schrieb Matti Bickel:
According to
http://hilfe-center.1und1.de/hosting/scripte_datenbanken/php/6.html the
advertised PHP6 is probably PHP5.4RC6...
what has this do do with PHP6?
That page seem to list all php configurations they
Gustavo Lopes wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 00:06:45 +0100, Ángel González wrote:
I've gone ahead and written code for that feature. Comments welcome.
The comparison has a problem: if char is signed (the most common
scenario), you'll be making a signed comparison, so any character over
0x7f
On 03/02/12 15:01, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I've committed a different version that also forbids \0 (since, as
Stefan says, a NUL byte can result in the truncation of the rest of
the header) and that accepts a CRLF:
On 03/02/12 23:00, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
As it's a security patch and of small scope, I would consider it for
5.4. Stas, David?
Do we have unit tests for this code? The fix involves changes in header
sending so it may have impact on lots of code. Changes like this can be
dangerous.
On 03/02/12 21:44, Ángel González wrote:
On 03/02/12 15:01, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I've committed a different version that also forbids \0 (since, as
Stefan says, a NUL byte can result in the truncation of the rest of
the header) and that accepts a CRLF:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src
Stefan Esser wrote:
And there are many many good reasons, why Suhosin must be external to PHP.
The most obvious one is that the code is clearly separated, so that not
someone of the hundred PHP commiters accidently breaks a safe guard.
That's not a justification to keep it as a patch.
Safe
On 28/01/12 03:05, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
There is a 100k limit, but the error message you are getting indicates
that you aren't actually hitting that limitation. The server config has
a 2M limit, so you should be fitting well within that. I'm not sure how
your 200k patch is hittig that file is
On 26/01/12 11:35, Kiall Mac Innes wrote:
Surely you can detect which operating system you're running on, and have
PHP act accordingly?
(Note: on my phone, haven't read the link!)
Kiall
It's probably not reliable. Note that a simple and completely reliable
solution
would be instead of having
About Kiyoto's patch:
Some servers would read as new headers if the newlines were just \n or \r
(which would be illegal per HTTP spec). I think the characters to ban
are: \n \r \0
Just replace your call to zend_trim_after_carriage_return with:
+ strtok(new_value, \r\n); // Truncate on \n, \r
On 26/01/12 00:22, Robert Eisele wrote:
My specific problem could be tackled in two ways:
- Scan . every time cli is called for a php.ini file or
- Try to make argv interpretation more intelligent and parse/merge shebang
parameters.
There are |.user.ini files, but only for CGI/FastCGI
On 18/01/12 20:35, Pierre Joye wrote:
Actually, no. There are any number of free mechanisms to build 64 bit code.
None of them are part of what we support tho' (we do not support mingw
for example, and won't support it).
Actually, why couldn't mingw be supported one day?
(supposing someone
On 04/01/12 17:18, Keloran wrote:
which can if your doing lots of checking alot of extra code for no reason,
or if you want to use variables, lots of louse variables just for something
that could be pulled from the request
I don't think it would mean 'a lot of code', but if it bothers you in
On 24/12/11 15:55, Lester Caine wrote:
I'm with Derek ... having commits that are just WS corrections can be
irritating when tracking changes ... but it would most definitely
better to get them fixed before moving to git which would lump mass
commits like that together in a change set and make
On 24/12/11 18:22, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
It's really simple, and would likely be optimized away by the compiler
anyway, but I figured it was worth cleaning up...
Yep, it's straightforward.
I'm not sure if it makes a difference or not.
IS_DOUBLE is between IS_LONG and IS_BOOL so the compiler
Your examples only show class methods with visibility qualifyiers, and
looking at the changes to zend_language_parser.y
it seems as if would only be available for methods. Wouldn't return
hints be available for plain functions?
In functional programming, it is common to return nullable types:
On 23/12/11 00:08, Will Fitch wrote:
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 22, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Ángel González keis...@gmail.com wrote:
Your examples only show class methods with visibility qualifyiers, and
looking at the changes to zend_language_parser.y
it seems as if would only be available
On 23/12/11 01:00, Will Fitch wrote:
On Dec 22, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
In PHP, returning object if everything is OK and false if not is a very
common pattern.
Also, you understand that always allowing null means that this construct:
$foo =
(I'm unsure about the T_DOUBLE_ARROW, although for parsing, I feel there
should be some token there
before the class name, though I'm unconvinced on which)
What about this?
function foo (Class1 $a, Class2 $b) return Class3 {
/* Do something */
return new Class3($a, $b);
}
--
PHP
On 19/12/11 21:23, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
Barbu,
This is how constants work in all viable languages such as C/++.
I disagree. In C you can have:
const data foo[] = { { Data1, 2 }, { Data2, 78 } };
It's not unusual in php to have a complex structure that won't change
in a variable. It should be
On 14/12/11 22:53, Will Fitch wrote:
I believe he's referring to sys/time.h, but this introduces portability
issues. If it were just unix, that would be one thing. But maintaining this
and a Windows alternative, and I have no idea what that is, is not worth it
IMO.
time.h is present in
On 15/12/11 00:10, Oleg Oshmyan wrote:
PHP internally already has php_localtime_r and php_gmtime_r in
main/php_reentrancy.h, implemented in main/reentrancy.c, and they are
already used in various places in the code, including the guessing
algorithm that is being removed in PHP 5.4. So at the
On 10/12/11 16:30, Clint M Priest wrote:
I've got 122 tests that are failing on a full run, if I write the failed
tests to a file and re-run just those tests, all of them pass. Any ideas
whats up?
A previous test breaking them?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
Am 28.10.11 17:29, Reindl Harald schrieb:
Am 28.10.2011 10:59, schrieb Michael Wallner:
gzencode in PHP-5.4 behaves differently than in previous versions.
I outlined the reasoning in the comment from 2009-03-03 22:11 UTC
at http://bugs.php.net/47178
as long gzdecode() can decode stored data
Ivan Enderlin wrote:
Hi all,
Some days ago, I have filled a bug about an issue with
stream_socket_recvfrom() only (apparently) on Windows7. You will see all
the details here: . This bug is important for my Windows users and I hope
seeing this bug fixed in PHP5.4. I am willing to write a
On 29/09/11 14:14, Olivier Favre wrote:
Hi everyone,
I've been developing a PHP extension for internal needs.
We're using C++, by using PHP_REQUIRE_CXX() in config.m4.
I'm using debian sid 64bits, with the package php5-dev-5.3.8-2
(against which the patch below has been created).
(...)
My
On 29/09/11 17:42, Olivier Favre wrote:
I checked with a tiny test program, you're right about GCC complaining.
The right fix is to make the field const (I don't know about const keyword).
G++ won't give warnings, no error would be triggered by a broken fix.
By the way, const char* and char
Gustavo Lopes wrote:
const char * and char const * are the same (just like const int and
int const are the same); what's not the same is char *const.
Andrey Hristov wrote:
it's easy, whatever const is closer to is immutable
const char * is a pointer to a const char, because the const is
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
well if there would be used Reply-To-Headers
tell me ONE reason to get every answer twice
I don't get two emails in gmail, I don't know that the list is smart
enough to not send emails those who are to or cc'ed, or maybe it's a
gmail feature.
That's a gmail (mis)feature.
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
A benefit of being addressed in the email that hasn't been mentioned yet,
johannes mentioned it:
http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg53737.html
Yes, I noticed it /after/ sending. :(
Our emails were alike. We mentioned the same usage pattern and both
Reindl Harald wrote:
below a correct open_basedir restriction
but why can fopen() create this file outside the
basedir and after that the restriction is active?
this means in other words: fopen() can empty files outside the basedir
if their permissions are open enough
Sep 27 10:53:26
Reindl Harald schrieb:
[root@arrakis:~]$ stat /tmp/rhcsvz8QeBL
File: „/tmp/rhcsvz8QeBL“
Are you sure it is the fopen() what is making it?
I think that some other function/extension may be creating the temporary file
/tmp/rhcsvz8QeBL for you to open, which then fails due to the open_basedir.
Richard Quadling wrote:
Hi.
Sometimes I remove Release prior to nmake to make sure everything builds clean.
2 directories fail to get build
Release\win32
Release\devel
The attached patch fixes that.
- @for %D in ($(BUILD_DIRS_SUB)) do @if not exist %D @mkdir %D NUL
+ @for %D in
Flavius Aspra wrote:
Hi
I think I've found a bug in the engine, and I think it occures only
with the latest gcc (gcc version 4.6.1 20110819 (prerelease)), since
it used to work with earlier versions.
For example line 867
http://lxr.php.net/opengrok/xref/PHP_5_3/Zend/zend_execute_API.c#867
Laruence wrote:
Hi:
strn(case)cmp dosen't support a negative length as its third
paramter, while substr dose.
here is the rfc: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strncmpnegativelen
any question? plz worte me back.
thanks
What do you exactly mean by in the reverse order in
if the abs of
Derick Rethans wrote:
Raise E_DEPRECATED when running the CGI or any web server SAPI and a
php.ini file does not contain “magic_quotes_gpc = Off”.
and
Raise E_ERROR when running the CGI or any web server SAPI and a php.ini
file does not contain “magic_quotes_gpc = Off”.
Doesn't that mean that
Pascal COURTOIS wrote:
Hi,
Is there any way that a variable can be changed within a function without
passing it by reference ?
I have a code like that:
function myfunction($var)
{
some code
print_r($var); = prints $var which is an object
anotherfunction($var); // call by value
Lars Schultz wrote:
Hi internals,
Jani told me to ask the list about this. I tried commenting on the bug
but I guess since it's closed, no one cares about it anymore.
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=49189
This Change prevents us to move to anything beyond this bugfix with
our codebase and
reeze wrote:
Hi,
I am not sure it's the right place to discuss this. someday I found I call a
static method _instancely_.
the method is just a helper method when reviewing my code. I know I do the
wrong thing, but PHP doesn't
complain about it. then I do some tests like below:
A few
Ben Schmidt wrote:
$var = $arr['key'] ?? : 'empty';
Also note this is possible with the recent proposal Hannes and I were
discussing. It simply looks like
$var = $arr?['key'] ?: 'empty';
The ?[ avoids notices and the ?: works as it always has.
Ben.
If it was going to be ?[, I'd much
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
Same here.
Here's my take:
[1] I don't like ?? / ? because it is disjunctive with === / ==.. The
extra equals sign strengthens equality comparison, while the extra
question mark essentially _weakens_ the ternary operator (making it
more forgiving). (Sure, a
Olivier Hoareau wrote:
I don't think that people are gonna like that kind of approach, having two
binaries with one of them coming from custom source should raise some
concerns and you won't like the prospects of maintaining PHP for older
Debian/Ubuntu versions.
My users currently does not
Alec wrote:
I actually wrote that. I never imagined someone would actually find
that useful!
If you don't mind having a few external dlls, you can use dl (ick!) to
load the extensions.
I gave up supporting that because compiling the custom lightweight
stubs took more work than I cared for.
Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
Regarding the patch (https://gist.github.com/835698):
I don't see a switch to disable the internal parse on configure.
I don't see any obvious reason it should be able to be turned off
through the build option. The only problem is binary size increase,
which I guess
Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
Hi,
Just to let you know that I wrote a RFC about built-in web server
feature with which PHP can serve contents without a help of web
servers. That would be handy for development purpose.
If interested, have a look at http://wiki.php.net/rfc/builtinwebserver .
Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
http://volnitsky.com/project/str_search/
I'm not sure it'd be easy to integrate this into PHP codebase as-is,
provided it relies on C++ standard libraries which PHP makes no use of
(and thus potentially introduces a world of dependencies and
complexities into the
Have you taken a look at Runkit_Sandbox? It may provide useful tips.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 19/01/11 23:10, Sam Vilain wrote:
On 20/01/11 10:17, Ángel González wrote:
Have you taken a look at Runkit_Sandbox? It may provide useful tips.
*headdesk*
No, I hadn't seen that. Thanks for pointing this out, it looks like
exactly what I was trying to reinvent...
Cheers,
Sam.
You may
Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I know you're responding to Pierre's proposed addition of a way to
disable POST data handling altogether possibly via an ini option, but
since the objection also applies to the ini option I've added to
trunk, I'd like to address it.
Yes, it sucks that the option cannot
Gustavo Lopes wrote:
I've committed to trunk the patch with the name of the ini option changed
from disable_post_data_processing to enable_post_data_reading.
Pierre Joye wrote:
hi,
The more I look at this option the more I think it is confusing. I'm
not sure the gain is worth this
Andrey Hristov wrote:
I am not against global variables, I'm against usage of $GLOBALS and
global.
So how do you support global variables by banning the two ways they can
be accessed?
-1
From a Framework point of view, they should save all of the
(super)global variables from the global
Andrey Hristov wrote:
Ángel González wrote:
So how do you support global variables by banning the two ways they can
be accessed?
very easy, by using them by name. Global variables are those outside
of a classes, methods and functions.
If they can only be used outside functions they would
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 11:42, Michael Shadle wrote:
Not to mention, I have had issues (and I can't reproduce it properly
or I would report it) where sometimes i will have a variable in global
scope in one file, and I have to reference it as $GLOBALS['variable']
in another include, or I have
presid...@basnetworks.net wrote:
I feel that the downfall of this syntax, is that the get and set methods
can easily be scattered at either end of a class definition. With the
syntaxes I provided, it is easy to tell which of the methods a property
has defined at a quick glance, because
Richard Quadling wrote:
(I assume the variable has to be part of the current class or one of its
parents?)
Yes. I don't think it makes sense to have a class property actually read
a global.
If a project really need it (eg. some migration from procedural style to
classes), then
use the verbose
Richard Quadling wrote:
I'd really like this feature to be part of PHP.
I don't particularly like the use of what looks like a closure for the
set/get.
I used to code in Delphi and I always like the way in which their
properties were defined.
Essentially, the setter and getter are normal
Richard Quadling wrote:
As for reading $seconds directly ...
Well.
If you think of the element that follows read as $this-, then if
the parser can handle both ...
read $seconds
read getSeconds
then yes for both.
If not, then I'd guess that the getSeconds version should be the one
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
RFC: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/optional-t-function
Patch: http://schlueters.de/~johannes/php/zend_optional_t_function.diff
I'm -1 on this one. Besides this being confusing for people who want to
run newer code on older PHP
Dallas Gutauckis wrote:
Just to be clear, this works on the assumption that we don't know the class
name that the function resides in?
I understand the search argument, but to me it only applies to functions,
not methods. Is anyone arguing for removing the T_FUNCTION requirement on
Jérôme Loyet wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm sure when FPM should call extensions MINIT and MSHUTDOWN functions.
MINIT is called once by the master process after it forks any
children. It's done by calling php_module_startup() in
cgi_sapi_module.startup().
MSHUTDOWN is also called by the master
Raphael Geissert wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
But why do you want them to change? Short tags are convenient and if
the app doesn't have to worry about ?xml or ?xsl type stuff, it can
run happily with short tags enabled.
Because it is just not about the application but the whole
101 - 197 of 197 matches
Mail list logo
