Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > On 14 Oct 2014, at 13:47, Kris Craig wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > > Does anybody know why we have $_GET and $_POST, but not $_PUT and > > $_DELETE? As far as I can tell, the only way to get these out

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Ben Ramsey wrote: > On Oct 14, 2014, at 7:47 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > > Does anybody know why we have $_GET and $_POST, but not $_PUT and > > $_DELETE? As far as I can tell, the only way to get these out cur

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:25 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > On 14 Oct 2014, at 14:23, Andrey Andreev wrote: > > > That being said, from a purely semantic prospective, both $_GET and > > $_POST should be tossed - yes. In reality, you can't do that because > > virtually all PHP applications use them

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Mike Dugan wrote: > > On October 14, 2014 at 9:31:15 AM, Andrea Faulds (a...@ajf.me) wrote: > > > On 14 Oct 2014, at 14:27, Kristopher wrote: > > > $_HTTP_REQUEST_BODY and $_HTTP_QUERY_STRING for nostalgia's sake. > > Ew, non-superglobals. > > But $_REQUEST_BODY

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > > On 14 Oct 2014, at 14:42, Kris Craig wrote: > > > I don't think that would be a good idea, either. They require more > typing > > and it'd probably be a lot easier for devs to remember which one means

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Chris Wright wrote: > On 14 October 2014 14:46, Kris Craig wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Mike Dugan wrote: > > > >> > >> On October 14, 2014 at 9:31:15 AM, Andrea Faulds (a...@ajf.me) wrote: > >> >

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 10/14/2014 11:16 AM, Rowan Collins wrote: > > On 14/10/2014 17:18, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > >> I think 20+ years of history has proven this to be a non-issue. Of all > >> the things that people get confused by in PHP, $_GET/$_POST are rig

Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE

mew...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 1:16 AM > >> To: Zeev Suraski > >> Cc: Kris Craig; Rasmus Lerdorf; Rowan Collins; PHP internals list > >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] New globals for PUT and DELETE > >> > >> 2014-10-15 0:56 G

Re: [PHP-DEV] Thoughts on the PHP.net website

> > I'm not go further into the details of the problems we actually > have inside that code, as they are very obvious and the source code speaks > for itself I'm all for having a discussion about updating the website. But on the flip side of that token, you can't just "drive by" here, suggest a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Thresholds of backwards compatibility breaks

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > 2014.11.06. 2:46 ezt írta ("Andrea Faulds" ): > > > > > > > On 5 Nov 2014, at 20:34, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > > > > > > Regardless of those, I think it would be worse from the users POV than > our > > > current policy where we target no BC br

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Remove PHP 4 Constructors

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Julien Breux wrote: > I think that it is great time to end to PHP 4 constructors system for PHP > 7. > > IMO, It's a good RFC. > Agreed. I was going to suggest we throw E_DEPRECATED for 5.x, but you already have that covered in the RFC. I don't see anything wro

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] PHP 7.0 timeline

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 10:07 +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > After some Twitter hints that I should get my act together and finally > move > > this to a vote, it’s finally happening: > > > > > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php7timeline#vote >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] PHP 7.0 timeline

rued as endorsements of the BC philosophy you expressed, as well. That bothers me, probably enough to make me vote against this, so I really hope you remove it. I'd certainly have no objection to seeing that expanded into its own RFC, though. =) --Kris On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Kr

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] PHP 7.0 timeline

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Kris, > > This existed in the RFC since the get go and I don't believe anybody > raised any concerns about it. There was plenty of time for discussion. > Either way approval of this RFC won't have any effect on the approval or > rejection of

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] PHP 7.0 timeline

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Lester Caine wrote: > On 22/11/14 09:14, Pierre Joye wrote: > > That's why I strongly suggest to make a more realistic time plan and > > stick to it. Specific dates can or should be define later but the > > period (mid october f.e.) should be defined now. One week

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add a new flag for json_encode

On Nov 3, 2014 7:13 PM, "Juan Basso" wrote: > > Hi, > > I opened a pull request[1] in order to solve the bug 50224[2] and it ended > creating this pull request to add a new flag called > JSON_PRESERVE_FRACTIONAL_PART on json_encode function. This flag will make > the json encode to output float nu

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fix incorrect ternary '?' associativity for 7.0?

On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Leon Sorokin wrote: > > Respectfully, > > PHP's 'Unexpected behavior is not a bug' stance is pretty infuriating; the > utterly ridiculous T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM argument comes to mind. > > > It is not a bug, as the issue's status says: "Not a bug". > > I can unders

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fix incorrect ternary '?' associativity for 7.0?

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > The fact that it *may* break *some* code that is used somewhere despite > > documentation recommending against it (pretty much deprecating it > > already for years) is a terrible reason not to re-evaluate the situation > > gi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PHP 5.7

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi Adam, > > > On 16 Dec 2014, at 00:15, Adam Harvey wrote: > > > > On 15 December 2014 at 16:09, Andrea Faulds wrote: > >> The RFC can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php57 > > > > Thanks for the taking the initiative on this. > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fix incorrect ternary '?' associativity for 7.0?

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Leon Sorokin wrote: > > On 12/15/2014 11:59 AM, Robert Williams wrote: > >> What world is this that you live in where every line of code that’s >> written is fully unit-tested >> > > You took my example too literally; forget the unit tests. Imagine the > situation

Re: [PHP-DEV] Download PHP binaries

> > > But also (and mainly) because this is a confusing "link". > > Perhaps this link will clarify the situation for you: http://xkcd.com/175/ --Kris

Re: [PHP-DEV] constructor hook

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 08:19 -0400, Rasmus Schultz wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I'm going to make this brief, because I suspect a lot of people are going > > to jump at the opportunity to cry bloody murder when I suggest this. > HELP! BLOODY

Re: [PHP-DEV] constructor hook

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Amaury Bouchard wrote: > Sounds to me like aspect-oriented programming, applied to object > construction. > Take a look at: https://github.com/AOP-PHP/AOP > > Yeah I wasn't aware of this, either, but I can think of several scenarios in which it'd be useful. I kn

Re: [PHP-DEV] constructor hook

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:34 AM, jpauli wrote: > > On Sep 19, 2012 4:31 AM, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Amaury Bouchard > wrote: > > > > > Sounds to me like aspect-oriented programming, applied to object &

[PHP-DEV] Fwd: voter outreach

Hey guys, I got this request from my IDL contact a few hours ago. What do y'all think? Looks like a good idea to me at least. --Kris -- Forwarded message -- From: Douglas Schatz Date: Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:43 PM Subject: voter outreach To: Kris Craig Hi Kris, I&

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fwd: voter outreach

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > > 2012.09.20. 12:20, "Kris Craig" ezt írta: > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > I got this request from my IDL contact a few hours ago. What do y'all > > think? Looks like a good idea to m

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fwd: voter outreach

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > >> >> 2012.09.20. 12:20, "Kris Craig" ezt írta: >> >> > >> > Hey guys, >> > >> > I got this request f

Re: [PHP-DEV] Fwd: voter outreach

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > > 2012.09.20. 12:45, "Kris Craig" ezt írta: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > >> > >> > >> 2012.09.20. 12:20, "Kris C

Re: [PHP-DEV] Alternatives to mailing list?

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > I was thinking more along the lines of a collaborative wiki with > inline-threaded comments... > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jan Ehrhardt [mailto:php...@ehrhardt.nl] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 8:00 PM > > To: internals@l

Re: [PHP-DEV] Wiki account

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > Who's the karma keeper anyways? Do we get a score? ;) I'm not 100% sure, but I think the Hindu god Ishvara is the person you're looking for. --Kris

Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing the default value of "true" for CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYHOST

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:46 AM, JJ wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Sherif Ramadan > > wrote: > >> I understand there are people out there that don't read the > >> documentation and aren't aware of the difference between > >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing the default value of "true" for CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYHOST

> So you propose to implement strict type checking of parameters because a > few bozos don't read the documentation? That doesn't make much sense to me. > > What makes more sense is that the extension perform its own type checking > where that is appropriate. I have plenty of subroutine code that

Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing the default value of "true" for CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYHOST

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > All, > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Guillaume Rossolini < > g.rossol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Kris Craig wrote: >> > >> > What if, instead of cha

Re: [PHP-DEV] Recycle PHP Log

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Mario Brandt wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Antony Dovgal > wrote: > > Just use logrotate for that. > > On Windows there is no logrotate by defautl, so that would be a nice > feature ;) > > Cheers > Mario > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime De

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Lester Caine wrote: > Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > >> We need a frontpage notice. A big notice in the next UPGRADING file. >> There was nothing about this in the 5.4 UPGRADING file, for example. We >> also need tutorials showing how to migrate from mysql to mysqli and

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Pierre, > > Hard/soft deprecated? > > > > I suppose by "soft" you mean not actually deprecated but only > > documented as such? > > > > Correct. Hard = raising E_DEPRECATED from code. Soft = Documentation and PR > only... > By "NEXT" are y

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Levi Morrison wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: > > And in either case, removal would happen one release after hard > > deprecation. > > I'd actually propose that it is removed in PHP 6, even if there is PHP > 5.6 and 5.7, etc. So

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > Lester, > > My point is: less talk, more acts. > > You want better docs? Contribute. > > Cheers, > > I think there's definitely room for improvement in making mysqli tutorials more common and accessible, but I don't think that should cause us

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi, > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Pierre Joye > wrote: > >> > >> Lester, > >> > >> My point is

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:32 PM, David Muir wrote: > On 20/11/12 21:22, Lester Caine wrote: > >> Ulf Wendel wrote: >> >>>1. Add this link to the RFC?: > >> https://wikis.oracle.com/**display/mysql/Converting+to+**MySQLi > >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Thomas Hruska wrote: > On 11/12/2012 9:22 AM, Derick Rethans wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Adam Harvey wrote: >> >> I've written an RFC to cover deprecating ext/mysql in PHP 5.5: >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**mysql_deprecation

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] ext/mysql deprecation in 5.5

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Patrick, > > > Sorry, but removing the E_DEPRECATED notice when moved to PECL is not > > part of the proposed RFC and should certainly not happen. > > > > The proposal doesn't actually propose anything about a move to PECL. It's > listed in

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] ext/mysql deprecation in 5.5

> Kris, > > There was no "ext/magic_quotes" that was retired to PECL. You're comparing > apples with oranges. > > David > > I disagree. Whether we're deprecating an extension or a subset of functions, the practical impact is pretty much the same. As for moving it to PECL, why are we even discussi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] ext/mysql deprecation in 5.5

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: > Kris Craig in php.internals (Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:33:55 -0800): > >We also know that E_DEPRECATED works when other approaches do not. I > would > >point you all to the famous example of Drupal 7, which would break >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] ext/mysql deprecation in 5.5

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Kris > > > I think you're forgetting though that the same applies to PHP itself. Many >> repos still default to PHP 5.1.x. Adoption always tends to be a lagging >> factor. I don't see any evidence to suggest that Drupal and other distro

Re: [PHP-DEV] ext/mysql in PECL and E_DEPRECATED

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Muir wrote: > On 30/11/12 05:25, Ángel González wrote: > > On 29/11/12 18:17, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > >> Just pointing this out: that's NOT what this RFC recommends, and is > >> NOT what's being voted on. This RFC is talking about ONLY adding > >> E_DEPRECA

Re: [PHP-DEV] Things move slowly in the real world ;)

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Levi Morrison wrote: > > I'm lead to believe that the date was chosen simply because they do > consider > > the situation a bit of a joke ... > > Speaking as a current and long-time customer of 1and1 hosting, I do > believe that their business situation is a bit of

[PHP-DEV] camelCase on Exception methods?

Hey guys, Please forgive me if this has already been addressed, but could somebody tell me why all the methods for the Exception class are in camelCase? I don't want to wade too deeply into the "consistency vs. BC" rabbit hole here, but I'm just wondering what the general consensus is on this rig

Re: [PHP-DEV] camelCase on Exception methods?

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> Please forgive me if this has already been addressed, but could somebody >> tell me why all the methods for the Exception class are in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE RESULT] ext/mysql deprecation in 5.5

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Adam Harvey wrote: > All, > > I ended up leaving the vote open for a couple of extra days (been a > busy week), but I've now closed the ext/mysql deprecation vote. The > full results are at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/mysql_deprecation — the > short version is that t

Re: [PHP-DEV] php 5.3.14 nts source code for windows

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Amir wrote: > Thanks Anatoliy, but I don;t want to compile PHP source, I just want to > compile my own extension on windows via NTS PHP source code. > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Anatoliy Belsky wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > the source is always the same, get

Re: [PHP-DEV] Core liason for PHP FIG

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Lars Strojny wrote: > Hello everybody, > > for all of you who don’t know, PHP FIG (Framework Interoperability Group, http://www.php-fig.org/) discusses ways frameworks and libraries can work together and integrate much easier. Current PSRs are PSR-0 to standardize

Re: [PHP-DEV] Core liason for PHP FIG

ersonally to be a > good initiative. Rest of the answers below. > > Am 16.12.2012 um 11:50 schrieb Kris Craig : > > > My one concern with this idea is that it could give the erroneous > impression that the coding style standards your group advocates are > endorsed, implicitly or

Re: [PHP-DEV] Core liason for PHP FIG

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi, > > What does that have to do with the initial question? > > It is getting really annoying to see you hi jack every single thread > in this list with totally off topic and lengthy replies. It does not > matter if what the questions raised

Re: [PHP-DEV] Ruby's symbols

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > I know I shouldn't write "Ruby" in the subject of a letter for > > php-internals ML, but... Just wanted to ask, is anybody interested in > this > > feature in PHP? > > As I understand, :foo is basically an interned string "foo". But

Re: [PHP-DEV] Ruby's symbols

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 01/05/2013 03:29 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > In both cases, we really don't care what the actual values of brown, > black, > > and purple are. We just want it to be unique so we can reference each of > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Ruby's symbols

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 01/05/2013 03:36 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf > <mailto:ras...@lerdorf.com>> wrote: > > > > On 01/05/2013 03:29 PM, Kris Craig wrote:

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][discussion] 5.3 EOL

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi, > > While the 5.3 RM already unilaterally published some announce about > 5.3 status with the last release, we still have to clearly and openly > decide what is the best road to take. > > Here is the last version of the rfc: > > https://wik

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][discussion] 5.3 EOL

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > Would a voting option to tie it to the release of a future PHP version, > > rather than a fixed time interval, be appropriate? > > > Like in end it when 5.x

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Stas, > > This is a great illustration of different visions we have here. On one > > hand, we have practical, immediate feature that covers a clear use case > > and does not add any constructs or complexity to the core language and > > ser

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: A problem related to php 5.4.10 and possibly others

> > We > > focus those resources on the platforms used by 95% of our users. Feel > > free to dig in and send us some patches. Needless to say, all of those > > tests pass on Linux, FreeBSD and likely OSX as well. > > I will try that theory out on RHEL 6.3 and let you know. > PHP is hardly what I w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][vote] 5.3 EOL

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > I asked many native speakers and all understood it as "when 5.5.0 stable > > release will be announced". > > I didn't even think it may mean anything else until I've read this > thread. I don't think any significant number of voters

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal - Removing netware support in 5.5 or 5.6

Looks like a reasonable idea to me. Could you draft an RFC for this? --Kris On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:39 AM, marius adrian popa wrote: > Seems that is past it's time > http://www.novell.com/support/kb/doc.php?id=7003092 > > I would start with netware folder > https://github.com/php/php-src/tre

Re: [PHP-DEV] I think that "Function naming inconsistency" bug deservers more attention

> Now if someone could come up with a third party tool that reads an > application ... identifies all of the problems ... and at least offer > pointers to fix them ... I like that idea! Kinda surprised something like that doesn't already exist, actually --Kris

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal for serious BC compatibility aka language versioning

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Karoly Negyesi wrote: > > We do not consider a change [...] a BC break > > Let me help: backwards compatibility means a host can upgrade a > package without inducing a lot of support tickets. > > Best, > > Karoly Negyesi > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Develop

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal for serious BC compatibility aka language versioning

> This is a circular discussion and I don't see how it could end. > I do. Let's put up an RFC for it. That is one of the reasons we established that process, isn't it? So that ideas like this don't just end up in infinite discussions that go nowhere? Karoly, are you familiar with our RFC proce

[PHP-DEV] Quick question about bug 64154

Hey guys, Somebody filed a bug report (https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=64154) about non-bundled extensions like php_zip being included in php.ini. Is there a reason why we're keeping those in there, or is it just that nobody ever got around to removing them? Thanks! --Kris

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP User Survey

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Paul Reinheimer wrote: > Hi All, > > My apologies for the intrusion, I'll keep this brief. > > In many discussions over the past few months there has been talk about what > the community at large needs. Pierre said just earlier today: > > "I would also say it us t

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP User Survey

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Florin Razvan Patan wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Paul Reinheimer > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > My apologies for the intrusion, I'll keep this brief. > > > > In many discussions over the past few months there has been talk about > what >

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP User Survey

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Christopher Jones < christopher.jo...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On 02/20/2013 12:00 PM, Paul Reinheimer wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> My apologies for the intrusion, I'll keep this brief. >> >> In many discussions over the past few months there has been talk about >> w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Getting separate outputs with Date Functions

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:54 AM, David Soria Parra wrote: > On 2013-02-19, Stas Malyshev wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> echo date_create('@1361240634')->format('Y-m-d'); > >> // output: 2013-02-19 > >> > >> echo date('Y-m-d',1361240634); > >> // output: 2013-02-18 > > > > timestamp dates are created w

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP User Survey

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:45 PM, David Muir wrote: > > When do you upgrade to a new release of php e.g. 5.3 -> 5.4 >> - As soon as released >> - wait for the x.1 release >> - Once our OpCode cache supports it >> - When previous version hits EOL >> - When a new feature warrants the upgra

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Allow trailing comma in function call argument lists

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Peter Cowburn wrote: > On 14 March 2013 08:35, Sara Golemon wrote: > > Some unofficial votes going either way... Let's open the voting to > > see where things fall. > > > > Don't forget to start a new thread, as described in the Voting RFC [1]. > > [1] https://wi

Re: [PHP-DEV] cleaning up "Under Discussion" RFCs?

On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > We currently have around 40 RFCs on the wiki under "Under Discussion" > section, but many of them aren't actually being discussed and hasn't > been for long a time. This makes the issues that are actively > discussed/worked on hard to

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Adding a way to retreive compile options at runtime

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > On 04/04/2013 06:30 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > >> >> >> Joe Watkins wrote: >> >> Many extensions do not provide constants or functions to detect the way >>> they are configured, this may or may not expose those options, which is >>> bett

Re: [PHP-DEV] date.timezone E_WARNING -- Really necessary? What's the rationale?

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Levi Morrison wrote: > >>> The "U" in UTC *does* stand for "Universal," after all. It's a > >>> sensible default and as such shouldn't > >> > >> I don't think it's a sensible default - people don't actually use UTC > >> when considering dates. A minority of people

Re: [PHP-DEV] date.timezone E_WARNING -- Really necessary? What's the rationale?

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Levi Morrison > wrote: > >> >>> The "U" in UTC *does* stand for "Universal," after all. It's a >> >>> sensible default and as suc

Re: [PHP-DEV] date.timezone E_WARNING -- Really necessary? What's the rationale?

Again, why can't we just bypass this whole argument by adding a configure option? Something like --date.default_timezone="America/Los_Angeles"? It could then build that in so it'll assume that if there's no php.ini or if it's just not set in there. Problem solved, everybody's use-case covered.

Re: [PHP-DEV] date.timezone E_WARNING -- Really necessary? What's the rationale?

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Reinis Rozitis wrote: > Again, why can't we just bypass this whole argument by adding a configure >> option? Something like --date.default_timezone="**America/Los_Angeles"? >> It >> could then build that in so it'll assume that if there's no php.ini or if >> it

Re: [PHP-DEV] date.timezone E_WARNING -- Really necessary? What's the rationale?

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Daniel Lowrey wrote: > I understand that you can use php -d, but this is not a portable solution. > My specific use case is running a libevent-based HTTP server and I cannot > even run unit test suites without an .ini file because of this warning. Why > does PHP f

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP enhancement suggestion

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Martin Phillips < martinphill...@ladybridge.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > I wish to propose the addition of a set of PHP functions that would > interface with the OpenQM multivalue database product in much > the same way as PHP already has interfaces to other databa

[PHP-DEV] ENT_ALL or similar option for htmlspecialchars[_decode]?

I just noticed that htmlspecialchars_decode doesn't convert entities like and . Is there a bitmask I'm missing or are those simply not supported right now? If the latter, any thoughts on adding something along the lines of ENT_ALL to convert all valid entities from/to their respective characte

Re: [PHP-DEV] ENT_ALL or similar option for htmlspecialchars[_decode]?

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > 2013/6/27 Kris Craig > >> I just noticed that htmlspecialchars_decode doesn't convert entities like >> and . >> > > I think htmlspecialchars_decode() only decodes > > ext/standard/ht

Re: [PHP-DEV] ENT_ALL or similar option for htmlspecialchars[_decode]?

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi Kris, > > 2013/6/27 Kris Craig > >> Yeah I tried html_entity_decode already, but it just returned NULL. On >> the same input string, htmlspecialchars_decode returned the input string >> but with *some* spec

Re: [PHP-DEV] ENT_ALL or similar option for htmlspecialchars[_decode]?

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki >> wrote: >> >> > >> > 2013/6/27 Kris Craig >> > >> >&

Re: [PHP-DEV] ENT_ALL or similar option for htmlspecialchars[_decode]?

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Kris Craig wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Yasuo Ohga

Re: [PHP-DEV] windows.php.net

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > Hi, > > there has been some chatter about windows.php.net, which drives me to > the question: Do we need that site? Why and for what? > > Few data items: > * The "news" on w.p.n are not really maintained and provide > outdat

Re: [PHP-DEV] Call for participation: github pull request

> > How to actually get karma to manage those pull request in github? > > I know what you mean. I've been sitting on a patch I did for an RFC for awhile now because I don't have karma to post it. I know I could just add to the pull request queue but I'd much rather put a few more together first s

[PHP-DEV] Any thoughts on the TPP?

Since we've taken a stance against SOPA and the like in the recent past, I'm curious to hear what you all think of the TPP. The Electronic Frontier Foundation explains their position on it here: https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8229 I must confess that I haven't rea

[PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

Currently, I'm working on several parallel feature additions to the date extension. Specifically with regard to accurate calculation of seasonal equinox, an added paremeter character to display the current season in the date() function, limited hemisphere detection based on the timezone setting

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

ehalf and not for any company/etc. Please don't hesitate to ask if there's anything else you need from me to move this application forward. Thanks! =) --Kris 2010/8/10 Johannes Schlüter > On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 18:19 -0700, Kris Craig wrote: > > Currently, I'm worki

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

Sorry, I guess it would help if I actually attached the patch. Here it is. --Kris 2010/8/10 Kris Craig > Of course! Here's a patch of php_date.c (currently based off 5.3.2; I'll > need to rebase off 5.3.3 of course) showing the seasonal equinox support > I'

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

Woops, sorry. Here's the file renamed to .txt. Thanks for the tip! --Kris On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Michael Maclean wrote: > On 10/08/10 20:28, Kris Craig wrote: > >> Sorry, I guess it would help if I actually attached the patch. Here >> it is.

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

ll be more than happy to do it. Thanks! --Kris On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > Woops, sorry. Here's the file renamed to .txt. Thanks for the tip! > > > --Kris > > > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Michael Maclean wrote: > >> On 10/08

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

oughts on the latest date patch I sent. Thanks! --Kris On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Kris Craig wrote: > It's been a couple months since I heard anything, so I wanted to check the > status of my request and update you on my efforts. Things got pretty busy > so I didn't h

Re: [PHP-DEV] SVN Account Request: kriscraig

and should satisfy a lot of people who have requested this over the years. Bleh well my inane ramblings aside, thanks again! --Kris On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Daniel P. Brown wrote: > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 17:46, Kris Craig wrote: > > > > Could somebody (anybody) please email m

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC proposal for alternative list syntax

On Dec 27, 2015 7:56 PM, "Pierre Joye" wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> // With the new array syntax this has been improved to > >> > >> list ($a, $b) = [1, 2]; > >> > >> // I think this new syntax should logically extend to > >> > >> [$a, $b]

Re: [PHP-DEV] Bringing Peace to the Galaxy

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:22 AM Nikita Popov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:25 PM Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:02 AM Nikita Popov > wrote: > > > >> This is basically what I have been advocating for a while now already, > >> somewhat hidden between all the othe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags, again

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 6:25 AM Robert Korulczyk wrote: > > Disabling short tags now is done with "an explicit directive" (there has > to be a specific ini file with a specific setting 'short_open_tag = 0'). > > Isn't this the same "situation when you create a separate file with an > explicit dire

Re: [PHP-DEV] Vote: Straw poll for P++ feasibility

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 3:20 AM Olumide Samson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, 10:52 AM Peter Kokot wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 22:41, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:14 PM Derick Rethans wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > In the last week(s) there has been

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   >