On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> I've reworked the patch from
> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> (mentioned by tony2001) for bug #63437, that seems to fix the issue.
> That patch was ported back to 5.3 and adapted to the current 5.4+.
> Both variant
On Fri, 8 Mar 2013, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Christopher Jones
> wrote:
> >
> > Felipe added ZO+ to the bugs.php.net "Package affected" drop-down today.
>
> Hmmh.. That shouldn't be there as the current official issue tracker
> for it is on github, and is link
On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
I've reworked the patch from
http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
(mentioned by tony2001) for bug #63437, that seems to fix the issue.
That patch was ported back to
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>
>> I wonder what would be a good way to avoid allocating a temporary zval
>> for the key and freeing it again. Do you think it would be okay to pass
>> &EX_T((opline+1)->result.var).tmp_var into ->get_current_key() so the value
>> can be writ
Hi,
On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 21:57 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> >
> >> I've reworked the patch from
> >> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> >> (mentioned by
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> >
> > > I've reworked the patch from
> > > http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> > > (mentioned by tony2001) for
