On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Xinchen Hui wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
>> I initially looked at the final fix when I discovered the issue.
>> Follow me out on this. This is the current code as-implemented in
>> r323563:
>>
>> 265 zval *o
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> I initially looked at the final fix when I discovered the issue.
> Follow me out on this. This is the current code as-implemented in
> r323563:
>
> 265 zval *obj;
> 266 MAKE_STD_ZVAL(obj);
> 267
I initially looked at the final fix when I discovered the issue.
Follow me out on this. This is the current code as-implemented in
r323563:
265 zval *obj;
266 MAKE_STD_ZVAL(obj);
267 if (Z_OBJ_HANDLER_P(*arg, cast_object)(*arg, obj, type
Sent from my iPad
在 2012-2-28，0:10，Anthony Ferrara 写道：
> Out of curiosity, why are you changing it to copy the object for the
> result of the cast operation? cast_object should init the result
> zval, so why go through the step of copying the starting object to
plz look at the final fix： r32356
Out of curiosity, why are you changing it to copy the object for the
result of the cast operation? cast_object should init the result
zval, so why go through the step of copying the starting object to it?
Wouldn't it be easier just to do:
if (Z_OBJ_HANDLER_PP(arg, cast_object)) {
On Mon, February 27, 2012 2:31 am, Laruence wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Dmitry Stogov
> wrote:
>> Hi Laruence,
>>
>> The attached patch looks wired. The patch on top of it (r323563)
>> makes it
>> better. However, in my opinion it fixes a common problem just in a
>> single
>> place.
