On 27 07 2014, at 02:53, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
So even IF you want to reduce the scope of the 2/3 requirement to language
impacts in userland only, your RFC *still* falls under that requirement
because it directly affects the language itself in userland, as described
above.
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 07 2014, at 02:53, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
So even IF you want to reduce the scope of the 2/3 requirement to
language
impacts in userland only, your RFC *still* falls under that
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 07 2014, at 02:53, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
So even IF you want to reduce the scope of the 2/3 requirement to language
impacts in userland only, your RFC *still* falls under that requirement
Hi!
It would be good to have a section in UPGRADING.INTERNALS explaining
in details what should be done, very important for non core extensions
(pecl or other repositories).
Probably a good idea but I'm not sure what exactly to write there,
besides initialize everything, check everything :)
On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush?
Every day php-ng is not GA, PHP is losing ground to its competitors.
People seem to ignore this because of cosmetics.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush?
Every day php-ng is not GA, PHP is losing ground to its competitors.
Umm, how?
On 27/07/14 07:23, Kris Craig wrote:
Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush?
I think that the only 'objection' I have to 'simply' merging phpng is
that it is not just a 'single' change? This vote is all or nothing, so
every change is bundled without a vote on particular
On 27/07/14 08:26, Kris Craig wrote:
As you can see, PHP continues to dominate with over 80% market share and no
signs-- at least, none that I can see-- that we are losing ground as you
stated.
So again: What's the rush?
Especially since 75% of that are still on PHP5.3 or 5.2 ;)
But I had
On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my question to counter yours, Michael: What's the rush?
Every day php-ng
Hi Timm,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Timm Friebe p...@thekid.de wrote:
a couple of weeks ago, I proposed a change to the handling of the situation
where methods are called on non-objects. Instead of an E_ERROR, the engine
would
raise an E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR, and enable framework and
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
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
Hi!
Yes, I agree that this is not correct behavior - and I don't really
understand why it was introduced and why it isn't trivial to fix.
PHP-5.5 had a check for this case in place
(http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_5/Zend/zend_compile.c#7071) and phpng
contains an AST-compatible variant of the
Hello,
Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net hat am 27. Juli 2014 um 10:11 geschrieben:
Hi Timm,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Timm Friebe p...@thekid.de
mailto:p...@thekid.de wrote:
a couple of weeks ago, I proposed a change to the handling of the
situation
where methods are
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner
mike.php@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
[a lot]
Maybe because you see those as competitors, but I see HHVM and friends as
current competitors, being evaluated to replace stock PHP, which is definitely
not covered by any nice statistics you can currently view.
Cheers,
Am 27.7.2014 um 10:55 schrieb Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com:
Hi!
Yes, I agree that this is not correct behavior - and I don't really
understand why it was introduced and why it isn't trivial to fix.
PHP-5.5 had a check for this case in place
Instead of endless, useless bickering, how about everyone both for and
against merging jump in and start helping with phpng (docs, api
cleanup/stabilization, but fixes, etc)?
Imagine how much more stable and ready to merge it would be if you
concentrated the saber rattling energy towards actually
Wouldn’t it be simpler to just make them aliases?
Indeed, and as I have no problem if Lonny likes to go ahead with this
RFC, I do not think we need one for such trivial change.
Andrea,
Whom are you suggesting the alias would be simpler for?
Personally, I do not think it would be simpler
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
Wouldn’t it be simpler to just make them aliases?
Indeed, and as I have no problem if Lonny likes to go ahead with this
RFC, I do not think we need one for such trivial change.
Andrea,
Whom are you suggesting
On 27 Jul 2014, at 18:09, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
Whom are you suggesting the alias would be simpler for?
Personally, I do not think it would be simpler for the userland API to have
them aliased. I think an alias will cause unneeded confusion, discussions,
and waste
On 26/07/2014 22:55, Chris Wright wrote:
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
The way voting works now, I happen to know which option is winning. I
happened to know that *before* I cast my vote. The current results are
posted on the RFC, and the same information percolated into emails
encouraging folks to vote. I wonder, though, if knowing which was leading
and who
On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not
something I like to see in GD. I will rather remove many for php-next
instead of adding more. Also some new font APIs may as well make the
whole ttf ones
On 27 Jul 2014, at 19:17, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
I’m suggesting having this minor change be one of the BC breaks in php.next.
I’m not making the argument that it is important from a purely technical POV;
I don’t believe it is. I’m making the argument that it is
On Jul 27, 2014 8:17 PM, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not
something I like to see in GD. I will rather remove many for php-next
instead of
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 27, 2014 8:17 PM, Lonny Kapelushnik lo...@lonnylot.com wrote:
On Jul 27, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
However the idea to add yet other warnings/notices to ext/gd is not
Hi all,
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner
mike.php@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 08:23, Kris Craig
Hi Timm,
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Timm Friebe p...@thekid.de wrote:
Only thing that I don't like is it depends on error message to be useful
rather than error code/status. Was this discussed? Just curious.
No, this wasn't discussed so far. You're right, this could make the code
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
[a lot]
Maybe because you see those as competitors,
You're the one who said PHP was losing ground to its competitors, not I.
but I see HHVM and
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi all,
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Michael Wallner mike.php@gmail.com
wrote:
On 27 Jul 2014 09:26, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Michael Wallner
Hi Kris,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com wrote:
According to w3techs, JavaScript retains an extremely tiny market share in
terms of general purpose languages:
http://w3techs.com/technologies/comparison/pl-java,pl-php,pl-ruby,pl-python,pl-js
It looks like
First off, I realize I am top posting but this thread is becoming extremely
off-topic, unbalanced and overall ridiculous to see from the sidelines as
someone that contributes to open source and also utilizes PHP on a daily
basis for more than the last decade.
Seriously, cut the shit! Everyone is
On 27 07 2014, at 11:44, Kris Craig kris.cr...@gmail.com
(mailto:kris.cr...@gmail.com) wrote:
[a lot]
Maybe because you see those as competitors, but I see HHVM and friends as
current competitors, being evaluated to replace stock PHP, which is
definitely not covered by any nice
Hi all,
Since we have discussion for Next PHP, PHP namespace discussion would be
nice
to have.
Currently, PHP module functions/classes/interfaces are using global(root)
namespace.
If it is changed to use its own namespace, user space APIs may be changed
flexible and user controlled manner. Thus,
34 matches
Mail list logo
