Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On 5/19/2011 9:00 AM, dukeofgaming wrote: @Thomas I agree on dropping<% for good, I personally don't know any project that uses it and don't think there is currently any point to them anymore. Also, I do use ' Yes. -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Barebones CMS is a high-performance, open source content management system for web developers operating in a team environment. An open source CubicleSoft initiative. Your choice of a MIT or LGPL license. http://barebonescms.com/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 7:52 PM, dukeofgaming wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Philip Olson > wrote: > > > > > > > @all > > > > > > Can we decide on decoupling > tag > > > matter? > > > > It feels like decoupling not > > seen objections or reasons for not doing it, so think we can safely > assume > > that it's been decided. > > > > Awesome > http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=311260 Rasmus committed it for 5.4 \o/ Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Philip Olson wrote: > > > > @all > > > > Can we decide on decoupling tag > > matter? > > It feels like decoupling seen objections or reasons for not doing it, so think we can safely assume > that it's been decided. > Awesome
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
> > @all > > Can we decide on decoupling matter? It feels like decoupling http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
@Michael Those are interesting ideas, I think you can register by yourself on the wiki, so you can add the RFC. OTOH, and again, I must say I really think the echo shortcut should be regarded as a separate issue, and now that there was some consensus we shouldn't deviate from the topic. In the end I think it is going to be as bad to have short open tags turned off by default. Hosting services still meddle with the php.ini and some even let you make your own customizations to it (or at least to a subset of it). But again, can we first agree on the echo shortcut feature to be decoupled from short tags?. No agreements === no progress. BTW, what is your open source project? @Thomas I agree on dropping <% for good, I personally don't know any project that uses it and don't think there is currently any point to them anymore. Also, I do use 'wrote: > On 5/19/2011 12:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: > >> It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and >> make it "On" permanently. >> >> As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with >> register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I >> remember wrongly, but really do people really use<% ? >> > > Would be **really** nice if ' also detected (i.e. ' aid readability.) > > The ' used: Internal corporate servers, personal machines, and millions upon > millions of websites. The results and financial costs of cleaning up the > upgrade fallout of removing the ' > Comparing short tags to magic_quotes/register_globals is apples to oranges. > The two are so vastly different and not in the same class. The latter is a > failed security measure. The former is a syntactic sugary convenience. > Every PHP userland developer I know understands the risks associated with > magic_quotes and register_globals but, at the same time, they use the ' short tag extensively wherever possible. > > Or, perhaps more simply put: If you remove the "syntactic sugary > convenience" of the ' dropping by shortly after the release of PHP 6 and they will be incredibly > unhappy. But you just go ahead and remove the ' You'll be adding it back into PHP 6.0.1. > > The ONLY reason anyone types ' isn't guaranteed to work everywhere. And that rule really only applies to > open source software and certain web hosts, which is a very small segment of > the total PHP market share. It would probably be fine if you removed the > _option_ itself but merged ' anyone who uses anything but ' anyone if '<% ' support is dropped (but I could be wrong about that). > > The important part of this discussion is making sure convenient > functionality doesn't just vanish for stupid reasons. I recognize there > will be breakage regardless because it is a new major version, but looking > ahead one extra byte isn't going to kill you. > > -- > Thomas Hruska > CubicleSoft President > > Barebones CMS is a high-performance, open source content management system > for web developers operating in a team environment. > > An open source CubicleSoft initiative. > Your choice of a MIT or LGPL license. > > http://barebonescms.com/ > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Something I would add to this - I personally do use short tags in an open source project because mod_rewrite functionality, implemented either at the .htaccess level or at the httpd.config level. In either event, if you can use mod_rewrite, setting the php flag for short tags is trivial so I know it will be available. It's simply not possible (that I know of) to config a server such that mod_rewrite is available and php_flags short_open_tags will not be. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Thomas Hruska wrote: > On 5/19/2011 12:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: > >> It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and >> make it "On" permanently. >> >> As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with >> register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I >> remember wrongly, but really do people really use<% ? >> > > Would be **really** nice if ' also detected (i.e. ' aid readability.) > > The ' used: Internal corporate servers, personal machines, and millions upon > millions of websites. The results and financial costs of cleaning up the > upgrade fallout of removing the ' > Comparing short tags to magic_quotes/register_globals is apples to oranges. > The two are so vastly different and not in the same class. The latter is a > failed security measure. The former is a syntactic sugary convenience. > Every PHP userland developer I know understands the risks associated with > magic_quotes and register_globals but, at the same time, they use the ' short tag extensively wherever possible. > > Or, perhaps more simply put: If you remove the "syntactic sugary > convenience" of the ' dropping by shortly after the release of PHP 6 and they will be incredibly > unhappy. But you just go ahead and remove the ' You'll be adding it back into PHP 6.0.1. > > The ONLY reason anyone types ' isn't guaranteed to work everywhere. And that rule really only applies to > open source software and certain web hosts, which is a very small segment of > the total PHP market share. It would probably be fine if you removed the > _option_ itself but merged ' anyone who uses anything but ' anyone if '<% ' support is dropped (but I could be wrong about that). > > The important part of this discussion is making sure convenient > functionality doesn't just vanish for stupid reasons. I recognize there > will be breakage regardless because it is a new major version, but looking > ahead one extra byte isn't going to kill you. > > -- > Thomas Hruska > CubicleSoft President > > Barebones CMS is a high-performance, open source content management system > for web developers operating in a team environment. > > An open source CubicleSoft initiative. > Your choice of a MIT or LGPL license. > > http://barebonescms.com/ > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
I don't think this problems calls for a more flexible solution. On the other hand I think the flexibility _is_ the problem. Today if I want to write compatible php code I can neither use: ... or wrote: > I like the idea of having an option for no tags needed, since its a .php > file (or what ever you have set as your interpd name) that gets sent to the > interpreter anyway, it shouldnt really need opening tag, > > the only thing of this that i dont like is the runtime side of it, imo that > shouldnt be an option > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Morris wrote: > >> Some time ago I floated this idea without any traction. I wanted to make an >> RFC but never got any help in setting up an account to submit it. Here it >> is again: >> >> Tag style can be set from the ini file, htaccess/httpdconfig or changed at >> runtime. If changed at runtime it only affects files that haven't been >> included yet. Tag Style can also be passed as the second argument to the >> include, include_once, require, and require_once statements. Those >> statements fall back to the current setting if a second argument isn't >> passed. The tag style is a bitfield as follows: >> >> Bit >> 0 -- Standard tags toggle >> 1 -- Short tags toggle >> 2 -- ASP tags toggle >> 3 -- Script tags toggle >> 4 -- Short echo toggle. >> >> For backwards compat ship with bits 0 and 3 set on. The existing short tags >> mode is bits 1 and 4 on. If all the bits are turned off then we have the >> PHP_TAGS_NONE setting. In that mode the engine assumes the whole file is >> going to be PHP code since there will be no tags at all (helpful for class >> libraries that don't create output in the MVC architecture). >> >> If the php.ini file has either of the legacy tag settings turned on, and >> tag_style wasn't explicitly set, then php will set tag style to the values >> it must have to mimic the intent of the setting. If tag_style is explicitly >> set then it wins out - but a deprecated notice gets thrown to alert the >> user >> that they have both tag_style set and short_open_tags and/or asp_tags set >> on. >> >> If an htaccess or httpd.conf directive explicitly calls for short_tags or >> asp_tags after tag_style was explicitly set a warning of some sort is >> thrown >> informing the user that they must switch that declaration to one compatible >> with the php.ini file. >> >> The upshot of this is to allow distributions that want to use short tags to >> be able to use them without worrying about local server settings. Also, >> distributions can be made to contain files without any tags at all. >> Teaching IDE's that it is possible for a PHP file to have no tags >> could be tricky though. >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks > >wrote: >> >> > It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and >> > make it "On" permanently. >> > >> > As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with >> > register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I >> > remember wrongly, but really do people really use <% ? >> > >> > 2011/5/19 Ferenc Kovacs : >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Arvids Godjuks < >> > arvids.godj...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hello. >> > >> >> > >> As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > I think that it's a little bit hasty. >> > > I would propose that the short open echo should be always enabled >> > > independently from the short_open_tag, and this should be documented >> and >> > > done with it. >> > > Tyrael >> > >> > -- >> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> > >> > >> > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On 5/19/2011 12:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and make it "On" permanently. As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I remember wrongly, but really do people really use<% ? Would be **really** nice if 'also detected (i.e. 'to aid readability.) The 'used: Internal corporate servers, personal machines, and millions upon millions of websites. The results and financial costs of cleaning up the upgrade fallout of removing the ' Comparing short tags to magic_quotes/register_globals is apples to oranges. The two are so vastly different and not in the same class. The latter is a failed security measure. The former is a syntactic sugary convenience. Every PHP userland developer I know understands the risks associated with magic_quotes and register_globals but, at the same time, they use the ' Or, perhaps more simply put: If you remove the "syntactic sugary convenience" of the 'dropping by shortly after the release of PHP 6 and they will be incredibly unhappy. But you just go ahead and remove the 'tag for PHP 6. You'll be adding it back into PHP 6.0.1. The ONLY reason anyone types '' isn't guaranteed to work everywhere. And that rule really only applies to open source software and certain web hosts, which is a very small segment of the total PHP market share. It would probably be fine if you removed the _option_ itself but merged 'core. I don't know anyone who uses anything but 'likely be a huge loss for anyone if '<% ' support is dropped (but I could be wrong about that). The important part of this discussion is making sure convenient functionality doesn't just vanish for stupid reasons. I recognize there will be breakage regardless because it is a new major version, but looking ahead one extra byte isn't going to kill you. -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Barebones CMS is a high-performance, open source content management system for web developers operating in a team environment. An open source CubicleSoft initiative. Your choice of a MIT or LGPL license. http://barebonescms.com/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
I like the idea of having an option for no tags needed, since its a .php file (or what ever you have set as your interpd name) that gets sent to the interpreter anyway, it shouldnt really need opening tag, the only thing of this that i dont like is the runtime side of it, imo that shouldnt be an option On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Morris wrote: > Some time ago I floated this idea without any traction. I wanted to make an > RFC but never got any help in setting up an account to submit it. Here it > is again: > > Tag style can be set from the ini file, htaccess/httpdconfig or changed at > runtime. If changed at runtime it only affects files that haven't been > included yet. Tag Style can also be passed as the second argument to the > include, include_once, require, and require_once statements. Those > statements fall back to the current setting if a second argument isn't > passed. The tag style is a bitfield as follows: > > Bit > 0 -- Standard tags toggle > 1 -- Short tags toggle > 2 -- ASP tags toggle > 3 -- Script tags toggle > 4 -- Short echo toggle. > > For backwards compat ship with bits 0 and 3 set on. The existing short tags > mode is bits 1 and 4 on. If all the bits are turned off then we have the > PHP_TAGS_NONE setting. In that mode the engine assumes the whole file is > going to be PHP code since there will be no tags at all (helpful for class > libraries that don't create output in the MVC architecture). > > If the php.ini file has either of the legacy tag settings turned on, and > tag_style wasn't explicitly set, then php will set tag style to the values > it must have to mimic the intent of the setting. If tag_style is explicitly > set then it wins out - but a deprecated notice gets thrown to alert the > user > that they have both tag_style set and short_open_tags and/or asp_tags set > on. > > If an htaccess or httpd.conf directive explicitly calls for short_tags or > asp_tags after tag_style was explicitly set a warning of some sort is > thrown > informing the user that they must switch that declaration to one compatible > with the php.ini file. > > The upshot of this is to allow distributions that want to use short tags to > be able to use them without worrying about local server settings. Also, > distributions can be made to contain files without any tags at all. > Teaching IDE's that it is possible for a PHP file to have no tags > could be tricky though. > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks >wrote: > > > It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and > > make it "On" permanently. > > > > As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with > > register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I > > remember wrongly, but really do people really use <% ? > > > > 2011/5/19 Ferenc Kovacs : > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Arvids Godjuks < > > arvids.godj...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hello. > > >> > > >> As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple > > >> > >> > > > > > > I think that it's a little bit hasty. > > > I would propose that the short open echo should be always enabled > > > independently from the short_open_tag, and this should be documented > and > > > done with it. > > > Tyrael > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Some time ago I floated this idea without any traction. I wanted to make an RFC but never got any help in setting up an account to submit it. Here it is again: Tag style can be set from the ini file, htaccess/httpdconfig or changed at runtime. If changed at runtime it only affects files that haven't been included yet. Tag Style can also be passed as the second argument to the include, include_once, require, and require_once statements. Those statements fall back to the current setting if a second argument isn't passed. The tag style is a bitfield as follows: Bit 0 -- Standard tags toggle 1 -- Short tags toggle 2 -- ASP tags toggle 3 -- Script tags toggle 4 -- Short echo toggle. For backwards compat ship with bits 0 and 3 set on. The existing short tags mode is bits 1 and 4 on. If all the bits are turned off then we have the PHP_TAGS_NONE setting. In that mode the engine assumes the whole file is going to be PHP code since there will be no tags at all (helpful for class libraries that don't create output in the MVC architecture). If the php.ini file has either of the legacy tag settings turned on, and tag_style wasn't explicitly set, then php will set tag style to the values it must have to mimic the intent of the setting. If tag_style is explicitly set then it wins out - but a deprecated notice gets thrown to alert the user that they have both tag_style set and short_open_tags and/or asp_tags set on. If an htaccess or httpd.conf directive explicitly calls for short_tags or asp_tags after tag_style was explicitly set a warning of some sort is thrown informing the user that they must switch that declaration to one compatible with the php.ini file. The upshot of this is to allow distributions that want to use short tags to be able to use them without worrying about local server settings. Also, distributions can be made to contain files without any tags at all. Teaching IDE's that it is possible for a PHP file to have no tags could be tricky though. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: > It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and > make it "On" permanently. > > As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with > register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I > remember wrongly, but really do people really use <% ? > > 2011/5/19 Ferenc Kovacs : > > > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Arvids Godjuks < > arvids.godj...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hello. > >> > >> As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple > >> >> > > > > I think that it's a little bit hasty. > > I would propose that the short open echo should be always enabled > > independently from the short_open_tag, and this should be documented and > > done with it. > > Tyrael > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
It's essentially the same what I said - move it out of stort_tags and make it "On" permanently. As I remember the decision to remove short_tags was made together with register_globals, magic_quotes and other legacy stuff. I can be that I remember wrongly, but really do people really use <% ? 2011/5/19 Ferenc Kovacs : > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Arvids Godjuks > wrote: >> >> Hello. >> >> As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple >> > > > I think that it's a little bit hasty. > I would propose that the short open echo should be always enabled > independently from the short_open_tag, and this should be documented and > done with it. > Tyrael -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: > Hello. > > As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple > > I think that it's a little bit hasty. I would propose that the short open echo should be always enabled independently from the short_open_tag, and this should be documented and done with it. Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hello. As a userland developer i'm all for it. Remove short_tags and decouple : > So what would be there to discuss or agree on?, now that the topic is at > hand. > > Regards, > > David > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> >> As far as I remember there weren't any serious objections to decoupling >>> >> tags in a file, and nobody else is going to come along and use it on us. >>> >> >> That's what I think too, but since there was no agreement fixed on that, I >> put it into discussion part. >> -- >> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect >> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ >> (408)454-6900 ext. 227 >> >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
So what would be there to discuss or agree on?, now that the topic is at hand. Regards, David On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > As far as I remember there weren't any serious objections to decoupling >> > tags in a file, and nobody else is going to come along and use it on us. >> > > That's what I think too, but since there was no agreement fixed on that, I > put it into discussion part. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hi! As far as I remember there weren't any serious objections to decoupling That's what I think too, but since there was no agreement fixed on that, I put it into discussion part. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On 05/18/2011 04:47 PM, Philip Olson wrote: >> apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the > topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In >> discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so I >> would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something >> happened since this decision? >> I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe looked >> at the wrong place) > > The topic split into a few directions with "decoupling short_open_tag" being one of them. I moved it to "In discussion" because the > decoupling idea gained traction although afair it wasn't discussed at length, > but it's part of the 5.4 'to discuss' TODO[1]. > > Regards, > Philip > > [1] https://wiki.php.net/todo/php54 As far as I remember there weren't any serious objections to decoupling http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
> apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In > discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so I > would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something happened > since this decision? > I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe looked > at the wrong place) The topic split into a few directions with "decoupling https://wiki.php.net/todo/php54 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hi, I'm that somebody Tyrael is talking about. FTR, I'm all for deprecating short tags, but I do feel the echo shortcut is a separate issue. Perhaps if wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Philip Olson wrote: > > > PLEASE, let the dead horse be! > > >>> > >> Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :) > >> > > > > The horse is not dead or if so then no proper burial service was given. > > People are still waiting for the invitations and wanting to hear the > eulogy. > > > > So, instead I'll make the following assumptions and engrave them into > this > > topics tombstone: > > > > - short_open_tag is fully alive > > - short_open_tag is PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR > > - all distributed php.ini files disable it (5.3+) > > - the default will be enabled, forever, unless #5 is used > > - --disable-short-tags will exist, forever > > - no new alternative syntax will be implemented, ever > > > > That's the situation people should understand and since this horse is > > considered dead I will: > > > > - update php.ini ini descriptions to reflect this > > - update documentation to reflect this > > - mark http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags as declined > > - point to the declined rfc when people suggest these alternatives > > > > All discussion is over unless a human knows the above synopsis is false, > > because CVS has spoken. RIP. > > > > > apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In > discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so > I > would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something > happened since this decision? > I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe > looked > at the wrong place) > > Tyrael >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Philip Olson wrote: > PLEASE, let the dead horse be! >>> >> Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :) >> > > The horse is not dead or if so then no proper burial service was given. > People are still waiting for the invitations and wanting to hear the eulogy. > > So, instead I'll make the following assumptions and engrave them into this > topics tombstone: > > - short_open_tag is fully alive > - short_open_tag is PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR > - all distributed php.ini files disable it (5.3+) > - the default will be enabled, forever, unless #5 is used > - --disable-short-tags will exist, forever > - no new alternative syntax will be implemented, ever > > That's the situation people should understand and since this horse is > considered dead I will: > > - update php.ini ini descriptions to reflect this > - update documentation to reflect this > - mark http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags as declined > - point to the declined rfc when people suggest these alternatives > > All discussion is over unless a human knows the above synopsis is false, > because CVS has spoken. RIP. > > apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so I would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something happened since this decision? I couldn't find the suggested clarification in the docs either (maybe looked at the wrong place) Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
PLEASE, let the dead horse be! Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :) The horse is not dead or if so then no proper burial service was given. People are still waiting for the invitations and wanting to hear the eulogy. So, instead I'll make the following assumptions and engrave them into this topics tombstone: - short_open_tag is fully alive - short_open_tag is PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR - all distributed php.ini files disable it (5.3+) - the default will be enabled, forever, unless #5 is used - --disable-short-tags will exist, forever - no new alternative syntax will be implemented, ever That's the situation people should understand and since this horse is considered dead I will: - update php.ini ini descriptions to reflect this - update documentation to reflect this - mark http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags as declined - point to the declined rfc when people suggest these alternatives All discussion is over unless a human knows the above synopsis is false, because CVS has spoken. RIP. Regards, Philip -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hi! PLEASE, let the dead horse be! Apparently, this horse is not as dead as some would like it to be :) -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect s...@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: s...@zend.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:11:10PM GMT, Arvids Godjuks [arvids.godj...@gmail.com] said the following: > > Yes, it's really irritating to write http://suso.org/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
As Jani put it: PLEASE, let the dead horse be! - David On 14.04.2009, at 17:11, Arvids Godjuks wrote: Hello everyone. I've been writing for some time now at the last project and it really sucks. I understand reason on depricating short_open_tag and I agree. But I have a proposal witch can ease templating. Remove short open tag, but leave . Bacicaly PHP parser should look for 3). Backwards compability with old templates is preserved (old templates with 4). it with smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hello everyone. I've been writing for some time now at the last project and it really sucks. I understand reason on depricating short_open_tag and I agree. But I have a proposal witch can ease templating. Remove short open tag, but leave . Bacicaly PHP parser should look for
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Glen wrote: > I didn't say PHP tags were valid XML. I said short_open_tag conflicts > with > <% is not valid XML either, but it doesn't conflict with processing > instructions. > > Glen. Hello Glen, posting to mailing-lists is not a speed race so think about your answer before sending it. There should be no need to send four emails in a row as you can easily answer multiple persons / arguments in a single post. This discussion belongs to internals list anymore, so please move it to php-general mailing list. CCing the correct list in this mail. -- Mikko Koppanen
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
I didn't say PHP tags were valid XML. I said short_open_tag conflicts with Hi, > > A vote in support of short tags, although last time I checked they > were not removed in PHP6 (and I hate to see this brought up once more). > On top of that, the supposed XML conflict argument is not fully > thought through, since full PHP tags are not XML compliant either: > > "; ?> > > In the above example, XML parsers would do this: > > Processing directive: > Text node: "; ? > Parse error: > > > As you see, it's a much simpler world when we realize PHP was never > supposed to be XML in the first place. However it was supposed to be a > preprocessing templating engine, and so we need to keep it optimized > for that. > > Regards, > Stan Vassilev > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Why such a complicated-looking thing (that breaks syntax-highlighting, at least in my IDE), when you can just use: '; ?> Or turn short_open_tag off (and asp_tags on), and use: ... <%= $this->that; %> Glen. Kenan Sulayman wrote: > Hey Guys, > > Whenever I start an XHTML document, I do escape it this way: > >> > Where the > equals equals > > So, please do not deprecate it - because it's important for me :$ > > Thanks, > (c) Kenan Sulayman > Freelance Designer and Programmer > > Life's Live Poetry > > > > 2009/4/14 Philip Olson > > >> Today this topic may be the cloudiest and most heated in all of PHP. Here's >> the factual history of our poor little short_open_tag directive: >> >> >> php.ini values : short_open_tag >> >> >> PHP 4, 5_0 >> * Default behaviour : on >> * php.ini-dist: on >> * php.ini-recommended : on >> >> PHP 5_1, 5_2: >> * Default behaviour : on >> * php.ini-dist: on >> * php.ini-recommended : off >> >> PHP 5_3: >> * Default behaviour : on >> * php.ini-development : off >> * php.ini-production : off >> >> >> php.ini descriptions : short_open_tag >> >> >> In 5_2 our reason for discouraging it is: >> >> ; - short_open_tag = Off [Portability] >> ; Using short tags is discouraged when developing code meant for >> redistribution >> ; since short tags may not be supported on the target server. >> ; Allow the tags are recognized. >> ; NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing applications or >> ; libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP >> ; servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not >> ; be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code, >> ; be sure not to use short tags. >> >> In 5_3 it's: >> >> ; This directive determines whether or not PHP will recognize code between >> ; tags as PHP source which should be processed as such. It's been >> ; recommended for several years that you not use the short tag "short cut" >> and >> ; instead to use the full tag combination. With the wide >> spread use >> ; of XML and use of these tags by other languages, the server can become >> easily >> ; confused and end up parsing the wrong code in the wrong context. But >> because >> ; this short cut has been a feature for such a long time, it's currently >> still >> ; supported for backwards compatibility, but we recommend you don't use >> them. >> >> >> >> This history strongly suggests PHP is hoping and subtly forcing the world >> to stop using this directive, and although it's not deprecated the wording >> and treatment makes it feel it could be any day now. This situation must be >> clarified before 5_3 is released, and will likely require our BDFL to do it. >> >> In related news, what came of this RFC? It still says "Under Discussion": >> >> - http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags >> >> Regards, >> Philip >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> >> > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Which horse are you referring to exactly? Jani Taskinen wrote: > PLEASE, let the dead horse be! > > --Jani > > > Glen wrote: >> Right, but at the moment something like: >> >> that;?> >> >> .. works. i.e. no whitespace after the opening tag. >> >> Changing this would most likely break a fair amount of code. >> >> Glen. >> >> Evert | Filemobile wrote: >>> On 13-Apr-09, at 4:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >>> Hi! > Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: > '); ?> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful syntax deprecated. >>> I think the parser should look ahead and check for something like : >>> >>> />> >>> (either >> >>> Evert >> > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Thanks for the information, Philip. I hereby summon the BDFL ... erm, no pressure. :-) I really think ASP/JSP tags could be the answer. Glen. Philip Olson wrote: > > Today this topic may be the cloudiest and most heated in all of PHP. > Here's the factual history of our poor little short_open_tag directive: > > > php.ini values : short_open_tag > > > PHP 4, 5_0 > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-dist: on > * php.ini-recommended : on > > PHP 5_1, 5_2: > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-dist: on > * php.ini-recommended : off > > PHP 5_3: > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-development : off > * php.ini-production : off > > > php.ini descriptions : short_open_tag > > > In 5_2 our reason for discouraging it is: > > ; - short_open_tag = Off [Portability] > ; Using short tags is discouraged when developing code meant for > redistribution > ; since short tags may not be supported on the target server. > ; Allow the tags are > recognized. > ; NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing > applications or > ; libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP > ; servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not > ; be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code, > ; be sure not to use short tags. > > In 5_3 it's: > > ; This directive determines whether or not PHP will recognize code > between > ; tags as PHP source which should be processed as such. It's > been > ; recommended for several years that you not use the short tag "short > cut" and > ; instead to use the full tag combination. With the wide > spread use > ; of XML and use of these tags by other languages, the server can > become easily > ; confused and end up parsing the wrong code in the wrong context. But > because > ; this short cut has been a feature for such a long time, it's > currently still > ; supported for backwards compatibility, but we recommend you don't > use them. > > > > This history strongly suggests PHP is hoping and subtly forcing the > world to stop using this directive, and although it's not deprecated > the wording and treatment makes it feel it could be any day now. This > situation must be clarified before 5_3 is released, and will likely > require our BDFL to do it. > > In related news, what came of this RFC? It still says "Under Discussion": > > - http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags > > Regards, > Philip > > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
PLEASE, let the dead horse be! --Jani Glen wrote: Right, but at the moment something like: that;?> .. works. i.e. no whitespace after the opening tag. Changing this would most likely break a fair amount of code. Glen. Evert | Filemobile wrote: On 13-Apr-09, at 4:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: '); ?> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful syntax deprecated. I think the parser should look ahead and check for something like : / -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Right, but at the moment something like: that;?> ... works. i.e. no whitespace after the opening tag. Changing this would most likely break a fair amount of code. Glen. Evert | Filemobile wrote: > > On 13-Apr-09, at 4:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > >> Hi! >> >>> Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: >>> '); ?> >> >> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml >> documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as >> you see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole >> very useful syntax deprecated. > > I think the parser should look ahead and check for something like : > > / > (either > Evert -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
I'm not suggesting anyone be forced to do anything. But: ... <%= $this->that; %> Looks neater than: '; ?> ... that; ?> Hence my suggestion. Glen. Mike Panchenko wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > >> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml >> documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you >> see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful >> syntax deprecated. >> >> > > +1 > > One of the reason's for PHP's success IMO is the ease of creating templates > with it. Forcing everyone to write every time just just > so that you don't have to write off. My $.02. > > Mike. > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Stan Vassilev | FM wrote: > Hi, > > A vote in support of short tags, although last time I checked they were > not removed in PHP6 (and I hate to see this brought up once more). > On top of that, the supposed XML conflict argument is not fully thought > through, since full PHP tags are not XML compliant either: > > "; ?> > > In the above example, XML parsers would do this: > > Processing directive: > Text node: "; ? > Parse error: > > > As you see, it's a much simpler world when we realize PHP was never > supposed to be XML in the first place. However it was supposed to be a > preprocessing templating engine, and so we need to keep it optimized for > that. Which is one of the reasons we decided not to remove them in PHP 6. -Rasmus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hi, A vote in support of short tags, although last time I checked they were not removed in PHP6 (and I hate to see this brought up once more). On top of that, the supposed XML conflict argument is not fully thought through, since full PHP tags are not XML compliant either: "; ?> In the above example, XML parsers would do this: Processing directive: Text node: "; ? Parse error: > As you see, it's a much simpler world when we realize PHP was never supposed to be XML in the first place. However it was supposed to be a preprocessing templating engine, and so we need to keep it optimized for that. Regards, Stan Vassilev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hey Guys, Whenever I start an XHTML document, I do escape it this way:Where the equals equals So, please do not deprecate it - because it's important for me :$ Thanks, (c) Kenan Sulayman Freelance Designer and Programmer Life's Live Poetry 2009/4/14 Philip Olson > > Today this topic may be the cloudiest and most heated in all of PHP. Here's > the factual history of our poor little short_open_tag directive: > > > php.ini values : short_open_tag > > > PHP 4, 5_0 > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-dist: on > * php.ini-recommended : on > > PHP 5_1, 5_2: > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-dist: on > * php.ini-recommended : off > > PHP 5_3: > * Default behaviour : on > * php.ini-development : off > * php.ini-production : off > > > php.ini descriptions : short_open_tag > > > In 5_2 our reason for discouraging it is: > > ; - short_open_tag = Off [Portability] > ; Using short tags is discouraged when developing code meant for > redistribution > ; since short tags may not be supported on the target server. > ; Allow the tags are recognized. > ; NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing applications or > ; libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP > ; servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not > ; be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code, > ; be sure not to use short tags. > > In 5_3 it's: > > ; This directive determines whether or not PHP will recognize code between > ; tags as PHP source which should be processed as such. It's been > ; recommended for several years that you not use the short tag "short cut" > and > ; instead to use the full tag combination. With the wide > spread use > ; of XML and use of these tags by other languages, the server can become > easily > ; confused and end up parsing the wrong code in the wrong context. But > because > ; this short cut has been a feature for such a long time, it's currently > still > ; supported for backwards compatibility, but we recommend you don't use > them. > > > > This history strongly suggests PHP is hoping and subtly forcing the world > to stop using this directive, and although it's not deprecated the wording > and treatment makes it feel it could be any day now. This situation must be > clarified before 5_3 is released, and will likely require our BDFL to do it. > > In related news, what came of this RFC? It still says "Under Discussion": > > - http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags > > Regards, > Philip > > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Today this topic may be the cloudiest and most heated in all of PHP. Here's the factual history of our poor little short_open_tag directive: php.ini values : short_open_tag PHP 4, 5_0 * Default behaviour : on * php.ini-dist: on * php.ini-recommended : on PHP 5_1, 5_2: * Default behaviour : on * php.ini-dist: on * php.ini-recommended : off PHP 5_3: * Default behaviour : on * php.ini-development : off * php.ini-production : off php.ini descriptions : short_open_tag In 5_2 our reason for discouraging it is: ; - short_open_tag = Off [Portability] ; Using short tags is discouraged when developing code meant for redistribution ; since short tags may not be supported on the target server. ; Allow the tags are recognized. ; NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing applications or ; libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP ; servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not ; be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code, ; be sure not to use short tags. In 5_3 it's: ; This directive determines whether or not PHP will recognize code between ; tags as PHP source which should be processed as such. It's been ; recommended for several years that you not use the short tag "short cut" and ; instead to use the full tag combination. With the wide spread use ; of XML and use of these tags by other languages, the server can become easily ; confused and end up parsing the wrong code in the wrong context. But because ; this short cut has been a feature for such a long time, it's currently still ; supported for backwards compatibility, but we recommend you don't use them. This history strongly suggests PHP is hoping and subtly forcing the world to stop using this directive, and although it's not deprecated the wording and treatment makes it feel it could be any day now. This situation must be clarified before 5_3 is released, and will likely require our BDFL to do it. In related news, what came of this RFC? It still says "Under Discussion": - http://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags Regards, Philip -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On 13-Apr-09, at 4:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: '); ?> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful syntax deprecated. I think the parser should look ahead and check for something like : /Evert -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml > documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you > see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful > syntax deprecated. > +1 One of the reason's for PHP's success IMO is the ease of creating templates with it. Forcing everyone to write every time just just so that you don't have to write
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
Hi! Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: '); ?> It's a pretty small use case (that's a problem only if you have xml documents which has to have php code which has to be inlined) and as you see, can be easily handled. I think that should not make whole very useful syntax deprecated. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect s...@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: s...@zend.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
It was not my intention to initiate a massive debate regarding the use of short_open_tag. I posted for two reasons: 1. To ask if short_open_tag has been deprecated in PHP 6. 2. To suggest asp_tags as the recommended option for templating in PHP (to keep both crowds* happy). * The crowd *for* the use of short_open_tag (I don't believe that they are in favour of this tag because of the particular characters used, but rather because of its shortness), and the crowd *against* its use (believing that, since PHP's primary use is for embedding code within HTML documents, it should respect the use of other processing instructions). Glen. Jeremy wrote: > Glen wrote: >> >> It's short, and it doesn't conflict with XML. >> > > I have to say, I don't understand all the hate on short_open_tag. So > what if it "conflicts" with XML? PHP is not XML. If you use an XML > construct in your PHP, escape it. PHP can generate a lot of other > languages, too -- should every construct from these languages be > forbidden in PHP as well? > > Jeremy > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
I think that's what he meant by "escape it". I haven't used short_open_tags myself much, but as I've been exploring templating options I like it for outputting variables. James Logsdon On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote: > 2009/4/13 Jeremy : > > Glen wrote: > >> > >> It's short, and it doesn't conflict with XML. > >> > > > > I have to say, I don't understand all the hate on short_open_tag. So > what > > if it "conflicts" with XML? PHP is not XML. If you use an XML construct > in > > your PHP, escape it. PHP can generate a lot of other languages, too -- > > should every construct from these languages be forbidden in PHP as well? > > Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: > '); ?> > > to print the XML declaring, with short open tags, the xml part is > considered a piece of code, which causes a syntax error > > > > > Jeremy > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > -- > Kalle Sommer Nielsen > ka...@php.net > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Is it true that short_open_tag is deprecated in PHP 6?
2009/4/13 Jeremy : > Glen wrote: >> >> It's short, and it doesn't conflict with XML. >> > > I have to say, I don't understand all the hate on short_open_tag. So what > if it "conflicts" with XML? PHP is not XML. If you use an XML construct in > your PHP, escape it. PHP can generate a lot of other languages, too -- > should every construct from these languages be forbidden in PHP as well? Thats because with short_open_tags on, you need to use: '); ?> to print the XML declaring, with short open tags, the xml part is considered a piece of code, which causes a syntax error > > Jeremy > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Kalle Sommer Nielsen ka...@php.net -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
