e, that has not been involved in the earlier unicode
discussions, trying to summarize on them?
Regards, Jacob Oettinger
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
ision on how to move forward.
I would like to organize/collect/manage the information, but I need help in
finding the needed information.
Is this a good idea?
Is it silly to have someone, that has not been involved in the earlier unicode
discussions, trying to summarize on them?
Regards, Ja
On 21/04/2010, at 16.03, Stan Vassilev wrote:
>
> Ahem. We all secretly know how it should've been from the very start.
> Pseudo-methods for the basic types.
>
> $array->merge($array2);
> $string->len();
>
Yes. Maybe implemented so that they can be called like functions in a namespace
for ea
Hi
This is great.
Would it be equally simple to allow the syntax below?
$result = new ResultMaker()->getIt();
and
$resultOfFunc = returnsFunc()();
I think would add consistency because it would allow direct operations on any
returned value. I agree that it is not the most reader friendly cod
On 08/06/2010, at 12.41, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 12:23 +0200, Jacob Oettinger wrote:
>> Would it be equally simple to allow the syntax below?
>>
>> $result = new ResultMaker()->getIt();
>
> does this mean
>
>$result = n
On Mar 31, 2011, at 21:10 , Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 03/31/2011 10:58 AM, Martin Scotta wrote:
>> I think it's time to stop thinking in terms of "functions" and move
>> forward to "abstractions"
>>
>> $s1 = 'string';
>> $s1->contains($s2);
>>
>> $s1->indexOf($s2) === strpos($s1, $s2);
>>
>>
On Apr 2, 2011, at 15:24 , Jordi Boggiano wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Jacob Oettinger wrote:
>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 21:10 , Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/31/2011 10:58 AM, Martin Scotta wrote:
>>>> I think it's time to stop
