On 26/07/14 02:42, Bishop Bettini wrote:
So I'm all for open information. My point is about human factors. When the
results are listed alongside the argument, the results themselves *become
part of the argument*. That is the nature of the bandwagon effect. *The
brain treats the results as a
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
PHP-5.6 is frozen for new features for a long time.
Adding new features after RC is not a good idea.
And we will need some kind of RFC and voting.
I
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
Hi!
yeah, that would work ofc, but as these libs seems to have instanitate
arbitrary classes, that would require either generating files on the fly
and including them or simply evaling them, but of those are a
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
Hi!
yeah, that would work ofc, but as these libs seems to have instanitate
arbitrary classes, that would require either generating files on the
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Nikita Popov nikita@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Julien Pauli jpa...@php.net wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmi...@zend.com wrote:
PHP-5.6 is frozen for new features for a long time.
Adding new features
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
Hi!
yeah, that would work ofc, but as these libs seems to have instanitate
arbitrary classes, that would require either generating files on the fly
and including them or simply evaling them, but of those are a
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
While this is a major change to the language implementation, it does
not actually affect end users in any meaningful way except for the positive
Hi!
nope, some mock frameworks do that (afair atoum for example) but
phpunit(phpunit-mock-objects to be more precise) was using the serialize
trick and newInstanceWithoutConstructor()
On 25 July 2014 17:25, Larry Garfield la...@garfieldtech.com wrote:
On 7/24/14, 2:38 PM, Sara Golemon wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Rowan Collins rowan.coll...@gmail.com
wrote:
Zend is only one of many
contributors. Yes, the engine is still named Zend Engine but the
language has
Hi!
Could somebody please clarify what issues are still open here? From what
I understand, both the opcache issue and the recursion issue are fixed
now. What's the discussion about?
As I understand, the issue is that if you define class constant like this:
class Foo { const Bar = [0]; }
Kris,
I’ll make it short.
EVERY RFC affects the language in *some* way – be it its features,
positioning, perception, performance, implementation, testability, you name
it. Each and every one, or we wouldn’t be discussing it on php.net’s
internals@ mailing list. So I’m afraid I’m not going
On 26 Jul 2014, at 23:16, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
*“**Given that changes to languages (as opposed to changes to apps or even
frameworks) are for the most part irreversible”*
Implementation improvements such as PHPNG are not irreversible. New
features or changed features are.
In that case tthe voting RFC should be improved. The sentence about 1/2 vs
2/3 votes is really ambiguous.
Not fixing it will always lead to discussions over and over again.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:32 AM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 26 Jul 2014, at 23:16, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com
Hi!
What I found *not safe*, throwing unwanted warnings hitting an
undesired behavior, or even segfaulting, and thus needing patch :
- Dom
- Mysqli
- sqlite3 (sqlite3stmt class segfaults)
I'm testing a patch for sqlite3 right now and will commit it shortly,
but I could not reproduce
On 27/07/2014 00:32, Andrea Faulds wrote:
Is PHPNG a feature? No, it’s not. It’s improvements performance
optimizations at the implementation level. Those who have been following
my involvement on internals@ over the years know my position about both
feature creep and downwards
Hi!
What I found *safe*, with checkers that check object is properly
initialized, so not needing patch, but throwing exceptions or warnings
when used bad constructed :
- SPL
SPL unfortunately is not safe at all - a lot of iterator classes
segfault on no-ctor initialization. I'll make a patch
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Kris,
I’ll make it short.
EVERY RFC affects the language in *some* way – be it its features,
positioning, perception, performance, implementation, testability, you name
it.
I believe that argument is specious. The
On 27 Jul 2014, at 01:53, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
so func_get_arg() and func_get_args() will return current value of argument
instead of the actually passed. The following code is going to be affected
“function foo($x) { $x = 2; return func_get_arg(0);} var_dump(foo(1));”
Morning all,
Previously I posted on the list requesting any immediate feedback on this
proposal. Given the quick feedback I received I’ve made an RFC for deprecating
and removing the imagettftext and imagettfbbox functions:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/imagettf_deprecation
All comments welcome!
Hi all,
I appreciate the immediate feedback in this thread. Given the quick feedback
and suggestions I received I wanted to create an RFC to be able to collect
everything and move forward. I’ve written it out and properly announced it here.
Lets continue the discussion over there.
On 27 Jul 2014, at 02:30, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
Previously I posted on the list requesting any immediate feedback on this
proposal. Given the quick feedback I received I’ve made an RFC for
deprecating and removing the imagettftext and imagettfbbox functions:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Andrea Faulds a...@ajf.me wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014, at 02:30, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
Previously I posted on the list requesting any immediate feedback on this
proposal. Given the quick feedback I received I’ve made an RFC for
deprecating
hi,
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com wrote:
Hi!
What I found *safe*, with checkers that check object is properly
initialized, so not needing patch, but throwing exceptions or warnings
when used bad constructed :
- SPL
SPL unfortunately is not safe at
23 matches
Mail list logo
