On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 22:11, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
It won't be different in ZE2. This is not a bug though, but a tricky
design issue. The problem is figuring out at runtime when to set $this
or not in a method. What most people would probably find intuitive, is
that $this was set only in
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (1009 total including feature requests)
===[*Configuration Issues]
13561 Assigned --without-pear prevent install of php-config,phpize,...
19282 Won't fix Place
Hi Zeev,
I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way
you modified my patch:
1) private_002.phpt fails with
004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail'
in %s on line %d
004+ Fatal error: Call to public method fail::show() from context
hi,
Here's an improved version of this patch, which doesn't SEGFAULT on invalid
input. Someone just brought up this topic on php-de and qmail, so I thought
there is some interest in this patch .. Everbody else just ignore me :)
-daniel
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To
--- php-4.2.3/ext/standard/mail.c Sat Aug 24 13:38:13 2002
+++ php-4.2.3-daniel/ext/standard/mail.cMon Dec 2 01:24:35 2002
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include stdlib.h
#include ctype.h
#include stdio.h
+#include string.h
#include php.h
#include ext/standard/info.h
#if
At 17:02 07/12/2002, Marcus Börger wrote:
Hi Zeev,
I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way
you modified my patch:
1) private_002.phpt fails with
004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail'
in %s on line %d
004+ Fatal error: Call
Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not emalloc()/efree()?
Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy(). (Weird I mentioned it twice
in one day :)
http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html
Andi
At 04:54 PM 12/7/2002 +0100, Daniel Lorch wrote:
---
Hi Andi,
Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not emalloc()/efree()?
Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy(). (Weird I mentioned it twice
in one day :)
http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html
Probably there are even more things broken in my patch :) I'm
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would expand _ foo to ? foo\n?php.
Has this been requested before? If so, why it wasn't implented?
e.g.
?php
for(..) {
_ td
}
?
would echo \ttd\n to page.
--
PHP Development Mailing
Do you realize how ugly that is? What benifit would that have over something
way more readable like:
?php
for(..) {
echo \ttd\n;
}
?
-Brad
--- Jari Vuoksenranta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would
-1, no way...
-Original Message-
From: Jari Vuoksenranta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 11:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PHP-DEV] FR: echo line
I have a feature request: I'd like to have '#' comment like
macro which would expand _ foo to ?
Are you sure you should be using malloc()/free() and not
emalloc()/efree()? Also please use strlcpy() instead of strncpy().
(Weird I mentioned it twice in one day :)
http://www.courtesan.com/todd/papers/strlcpy.html
Probably there are even more things broken in my patch :) I'm quite new
to
hi,
Good because I havn't seen any positive responses to this and I'm still
negative on it.
You don't have to use it.
Apart from disagreement with the prinicipal here I'd also ask: Where is
the portion of the patch to support Win32 SMTP via the MAPI interface?
((as opposed to sendmail_path
Hi
In the NEWS file for 4.3.0 there should definitly be an entry about renaming
php.exe to php-cgi.exe on win32, maybe this should even be mentioned on the
download page together with the release. If not, there will be many bug
reports about HTTP 500 errors and premature end of script headers
At 00:02 08.12.2002, Christoph Grottolo wrote:
Hi
In the NEWS file for 4.3.0 there should definitly be an entry about renaming
php.exe to php-cgi.exe on win32, maybe this should even be mentioned on the
download page together with the release. If not, there will be many bug
reports about HTTP
translating the documentation from english into polish
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 16:48 07.12.2002, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 17:02 07/12/2002, Marcus Börger wrote:
Hi Zeev,
I have changed the test files and encountered some problems with the way
you modified my patch:
1) private_002.phpt fails with
004- Fatal error: Call to private method pass::show() from context 'fail'
At 00:35 08.12.2002, Christoph Grottolo wrote:
Marcus Börger wrote:
Christoph Grottolo wrote:
BTW, I still don't understand why php-cli cannot be called
php-cli.exe on win32. Like this, many users would guess how the
problem cgi and 4.3.0 can be solved even if they don't read php-dev
(or
Yes that could happen...maybe we should have another *big*
message for the configure part and a *huge* message in the
release notes and news entries.
This is no different than when register_globals suddenly got turned off.
I think a big ole' message at the end of ./configure will drastically
Marcus Börger wrote:
I understand the reason why cli has to get a short name (the
lazyness of good programmers). What i don't understand is why it has
to be called php.exe. You force each and every user of php-cgi on
win32 to change his webserver configuration when switching to 4.3.0.
yes
On Sunday 08 December 2002 01:02, John Coggeshall wrote:
I think a big ole' message at the end of ./configure will drastically
reduce the number of problems.
With php.exe? *g*
Also, perhaps a check could be put in the
CLI version of PHP that would throw an error message if it is being used
At 21:06 7-12-2002, you wrote:
A more generalized fix would be to append the Return-Path to the headers
string at the top of the php_mail function so that it's caught by both the
sendmail block and by the TSendMail call (MAPI).
Setting Return-Path is useless. It's stripped by sendmail, unless
I can't find the chinese document in this website. I want to know if there is somebody
try to translate it to chinese. I think I can help him. I have a question are
traditional chinese and simply chinese different?. I prefer traditional chinese.
--
PHP Development Mailing List
23 matches
Mail list logo
