Guys,
I suggest we stop this thread now. It's just taking up time we could use to
more fruitfully in improving PHP. Please move any further rants off the
internals mailing list and keep them personal.
I do think that if there are some concrete suggestions to be heard that's
fine, but try and
Daniel C. wrote:
Things like Maybe we shouldn't advertise feature
sets that are still experimental and Maybe we should finish up with
these libraries before we move on to new ones. Later he suggested
that experimental libraries be removed from the core installation.
We are already doing this.
David Zülke wrote:
Microsoft with it's 95% browser market share [...] has the responsibility
They don't care about 'responsibility' at all
to continue development of Internet Explorer, because otherwise the
IE developement hasn't happened in years, they are just now rebuilding
the team they
Hi,
attached are proto fixes for time_nanosleep (basic_functions.c),
convert_uuencode/decode (uuencode.c) and some pspell functions.
(against current HEAD)
Friedhelm
Index: ext/standard/basic_functions.c
===
RCS file:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
At last weekend's EuroFoo [1] I attended Marc-Andre Lemburg's talk [2]
on the Python development process.
I really wish we had a process similar to Python's PEPs [3] [4] for PHP.
Having guidelines for issues like adding a new module [5]
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
It smells a little too processy to me, but I wouldn't mind a system
that borrowed some of the ideas.
That is exactly why chose Learning ... and not Adopting ... :-)
We should have a look at it and see for ourselves what could work for
us.
Like a single collection point
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
At last weekend's EuroFoo [1] I attended Marc-Andre Lemburg's talk [2]
on the Python development process.
I really wish we had a process similar to Python's PEPs [3] [4] for PHP.
Having guidelines for issues like adding a
Just to clarify, I didn't propose taking the PEAR PEPr system verbatim.
To be honest, I have never really used it, beyond skimming through things
because it is handy that everything is in one place. I don't find our
feature/change request category in the bugs database to be all that
effective.
ze1_compatibility_mode when set on calls clone on objects implicitly and is
causing some issues with extensions such as dom and xsl to name a few. Is it
possible to add something like the contained patch, which would allow an
object to implement an additional clone handler used only when the clone
Rasmus wrote:
Really ? Are you sure ?
http://www.zend.com/zend/week/week146.php
Ok, one self-serving fix.
I was (again) expecting exactly that kind of response. I dont
understand why so much arrogance exists among a select few. And
it unfortunately reflects the community's attitude.
So
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Sterling Hughes wrote:
That's wrong. You should *never* require an E_WARNING to be sent
without being able to silence it, especially not on something so
unimportant.
It's just as wrong as trying to parse non-wellformed XML.
Then don't add the
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Just to clarify, I didn't propose taking the PEAR PEPr system verbatim.
To be honest, I have never really used it, beyond skimming through things
because it is handy that everything is in one place. I don't find our
feature/change request category in the bugs database to be
-Original Message-
From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your initial message didn't include a single proposed
solution. The only
thing that could even be considered close is the very last sentence:
Hopefully belts will be tightened up around the extensions and the
What is the issue? In general, as it's compatibility mode it's not supposed
to solve 100% but only 99.5% of the problems, and I don't really want to
change the engine's general API unless it's for a good reason.
Actually I have not seen many applications that have been broken due to the
removal
Oh boy, if you don't see the difference between concrete suggestions to be
heard that's fine, but try and keep it short, to the point, and
constructive and the email you sent then it is really preferable to
everyone here for you to stop emailing this list.
Andi
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
Roshan,
I have to say I agree with many of the points you're making, and
disagreeing with quite a few as well. Since I do agree with Andi that for
whatever reason, this thread has turned non-constructive, I won't reply
point by point.
The main point I agree with you about is that it doesn't
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 17:14, Naik, Roshan wrote:
I dont beleive all the people are being pissed off. They are just
I didn't even bother reading past this line, and I'll be surprised if
anyone else responds to this because chances are you've already been
filtered out of existence. You're
Andi wrote:
Oh boy, if you don't see the difference between concrete
suggestions to be
heard that's fine, but try and keep it short, to the point, and
constructive
There were concrete solutions (if you cared to read. so atleast
read this one all the way)
And were also backed up by
http://www.zend.com/php5/andi-book-excerpt.php says
In PHP 5, all XML extensions have been rewritten to use the superb libxml2 XML
toolkit
But the official docs http://us4.php.net/manual/en/ref.xml.php
on XML extension say under the requirements section
This extension uses expat, which
On Aug 26, 2004, at 8:51 PM, Naik, Roshan wrote:
http://www.zend.com/php5/andi-book-excerpt.php says
In PHP 5, all XML extensions have been rewritten to use the superb
libxml2 XML toolkit
But the official docs http://us4.php.net/manual/en/ref.xml.php
on XML extension say under the requirements
The issue is that with some of the new extensions, the object breaks when
compatibility mode is enabled making the extensions useless. The patch was
basically an attempt to allow a way for the extensions to be able to run
under compatibility mode.
Take for example a simple case (NULL is returned
Hi,
http://www.zend.com/php5/andi-book-excerpt.php says
In PHP 5, all XML extensions have been rewritten to use the superb libxml2
XML toolkit
But the official docs http://us4.php.net/manual/en/ref.xml.php
on XML extension say under the requirements section
This extension uses expat,
Hi Rob,
I understand the problem although I haven't analyzed it in as much depth as
you have as to when exactly it happens.
The thing is that I see compatibility_mode as something which is supposed
to help make most old scripts run with PHP 5. I think scripts that take
advantage of new PHP 5
Yes, you have it to pick up from xmlsoft.org
There is no mention of the minimal libxml2 version required anywhere
either. The old dom-xml needed = 2.4.14
But on PHP5 It doesnt seem to like 2.5.9 either.
any clue whats the minimal supported version ?
-Roshan
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
On Aug 26, 2004, at 10:28 PM, Naik, Roshan wrote:
Yes, you have it to pick up from xmlsoft.org
There is no mention of the minimal libxml2 version required anywhere
either. The old dom-xml needed = 2.4.14
But on PHP5 It doesnt seem to like 2.5.9 either.
any clue whats the minimal supported version
Greg Beaver wrote:
PEPr has been pretty useful, but there are some pitfalls with the
current design of PEPr.
Most notably that everyone is allowed to vote ie. thinks his vote should
matter?
When it comes to voting I think it should not be democratic but
meritocratic.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
1. Submit proposal to web app
2. web app sends it to internals@ or some other relevant list
3. Replies to that email automatically get picked up by the web app
4. Alternatively, you can add comments via the web app which would
also get bounced to the relevant mailing list
Just to stop some maybe upcoming myths
On 26.8.2004 2:32 Uhr, Naik, Roshan wrote:
sockets, openssl, domxml are very useful extensions. Will these (and all the others)
ever get out of experimental ?
In PHP 5, dom and xsl are not EXPERIMENTAL anymore. This change should
have happend already with
28 matches
Mail list logo
