Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension...pecl it

This extension does not belongs in PECL. It is fully platform compatible, all other languages offer this functionality, it is actively maintained (by me), and it will be marked stable by version 4.3 -Jason n Mon, 2002-09-09 at 18:13, Shane Caraveo wrote: > Dan Kalowsky wrote: > > Because the us

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension...pecl it

Dan Kalowsky wrote: > Because the user can see how active such functionality is by looking at > the CVS logs, and doing a search on php-dev conversations. Sorry, but that's a copout. It expects way to much of the user. If it's going to remain experimental, OR the api is going to continue to c

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Dan Kalowsky writes: > Not to continue a "flame war", but this is Open Source, and it is > done on free time. "Open Source" is a philosophy. It shouldn't be an excuse. Nothing prevents us from treating people with patience and courtesy. Except of course bad manners and bad attitude. > Because

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

and benefit no one. --Roshan > -Original Message- > From: Dan Kalowsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 2:49 PM > To: NAIK,ROSHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension > > > B

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Because the user can see how active such functionality is by looking at the CVS logs, and doing a search on php-dev conversations. While the authors have decided to mark it experimental doesn't mean it will ever not be experimental. Not to continue a "flame war", but this is Open Source, and it

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

> > Between 15 days and 15 months. Looking at the CVS its been 19 months since the EXPERMENTAL file was last modified for sockets. No offense intended but, sometimes people dont seem to like to be asked such "obvious" questions by users. I realize that people in open source are not working for

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, NAIK,ROSHAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) wrote: > > And exactly how long is it expected to continue to stay EXPERIMENTAL ? Between 15 days and 15 months. Derick --- Did I help you? http://www.derickrethans.

RE: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

And exactly how long is it expected to continue to stay EXPERIMENTAL ? --Roshan > -Original Message- > From: Wez Furlong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:31 PM > To: Brian Lalor > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV]

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Which part of "EXPERIMENTAL" in the docs at http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.socket-select.php don't you understand? If you're so desparate to have things cemented, write a patch, post it here and we'll commit it. If you don't have the skills, you might consider offering those that do some p

[PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Do the maintainers of the PHP sockets extension ever intend to get their act together and cement the API, or are people who need this functionality going to be forced to rewrite their code everytime there's a new point-release of PHP? -- Brian Lalor |http://introducingt

[PHP-DEV] sockets and fds

Hello friends, I have a couple of questions about sockets and file descriptors. In my extension I make use of a ordinary c socket and two fds build on it. I want this connection to be kept over request, therefore I put a struct pointer containing this into the persistant_list of the zend engin

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 11:14, Steve Meyers wrote: > On Sun, 2002-04-28 at 22:43, Jason Greene wrote: > > In the case of a socket you are selecting on has errored, the socket > > will show up as readable. You then can perform a socket_read/recv, and > > you should receive NULL (errored socket), then

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

On Sun, 2002-04-28 at 22:43, Jason Greene wrote: > In the case of a socket you are selecting on has errored, the socket > will show up as readable. You then can perform a socket_read/recv, and > you should receive NULL (errored socket), then you can call > socket_last_error to receive the errno. >

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

Actually, I just reread your response again. socket_select returns NULL on a SELECT error, this does not mean that it will return an error on a socket IN the set you are selecting on that has errored. In the case of a socket you are selecting on has errored, the socket will show up as readable.

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

True, Threading support would be a powerful feature to php, but it is not likely to happen anytime soon, due to current design issues with doing it, and the fact that it would take someone who was really really focused on adding this functionality (it would be alot of work). Now with that said,

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

On Sun, 2002-04-28 at 18:31, J Smith wrote: > > One way to find which socket has died, if any, is to loop through each > socket in the three sets (read/write/exceptions) and do a select() on each > one to see if you can read with a timeout of 0. (The bad one being the one > where select() retu

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

I was hoping on tagging this extension as stable by the next PHP release. In order to do this, everyone needs to feel comfortable with the extension. Thanks, -Jason On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 12:46, Michael Virnstein wrote: > Hi, > > as i could read in the manual, the socket functions are completely

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

One way to find which socket has died, if any, is to loop through each socket in the three sets (read/write/exceptions) and do a select() on each one to see if you can read with a timeout of 0. (The bad one being the one where select() returns -1, I think.) J Steve Meyers wrote: > There's

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

You can kind of simulate multithreading with the sockets extension by using socket_select(). Technically, the result is multiplexing and not multithreading, but in the end, it works quite nicely -- you can handle multiple incoming/outgoing connections without the need for forking or multiple

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

Threading on the level you are talking about is unlikely to happen (search the archives!). If what you are writing is criticial enough to need multi-threading over multi-processing, you are probably using the wrong language :-) BTW: Under linux, fork() is cheap and there is not much difference b

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

There's only one thing it's missing -- the equivalent of socket_get_status(), which is not part of the extension, despite the name. If I set my socket to nonblocking, the only way to tell if it has died is to try to write to it, which isn't always a desirable thing to do :) Unless there's ano

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

The only feature which would be useful towards this module is threading. If PHP were able to thread it could handle multiple incoming sockets and neglegate the need for IPC between child processes (where PCNTL has been used) as it could all be handled by a common parent with shared (not copied) va

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

I've been using it since the first API revision and it's been working fine for me. (Up to and including the latest API revision.) As far as I'm concerned, it's getting pretty close to losing the experimental tag. (Perhaps by PHP 4.3.x or so, barring any glarring problems that I've not encount

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets

Hi, Simple when enough people have tested it and it reaches the consensus that it's mature enough for being called stable (api doesn't change anymore, more testers, you name it). - Markus On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 07:46:30PM +0200, Michael Virnstein wrote : > Hi, > > as i co

[PHP-DEV] sockets

Hi, as i could read in the manual, the socket functions are completely experimental. When do you think the API gets final and won't change anymore. Any comments on this are welcome. Michael -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.

[PHP-DEV] sockets: half documentation problem, half feature request

I've been trying to figure out how to know when a connection is dead when the socket is non-blocking. It seems to return the same error code (11) whether the connection is dead or if no data is waiting. On the socket_read() manual page, it says to see also socket_get_status(), which sounds l

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets Question

Uhhh nevermind. I just grabbed 4.2.0RC2 and found that a slew of fixes have already been commited. -e Eric Liedtke wrote: >Oops forgot the message body on the last one > >Ok so after sleeping on it I don't think my solution was >totally in line with the beauty and simplicity of php, I >expec

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets Question

Oops forgot the message body on the last one Ok so after sleeping on it I don't think my solution was totally in line with the beauty and simplicity of php, I expect you should be able to pass either a hostname or a valid ip in the addr arg. Anyway the other part that confused me is that in t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets Question

Eric Liedtke wrote: > I'm new in town here, so to speak, so I'm not sure about > proper protocol here, but I found,what I feel is a problem > in the socket extension code. Specifically in the socket_bind > function. I was working with a friends code and it was > trying to bind to port 80, howe

[PHP-DEV] Sockets Question

I'm new in town here, so to speak, so I'm not sure about proper protocol here, but I found,what I feel is a problem in the socket extension code. Specifically in the socket_bind function. I was working with a friends code and it was trying to bind to port 80, however when I would check with socks

[PHP-DEV] Sockets: new socket_select() example

Due to popular request, here is an example of the new socket_select(): NOTE: ***This code does not do any error handling*** -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets Extension Rework (API, etc...) VERY LONG

On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 01:40, Derick Rethans wrote: > Hey Jason, > > On 20 Feb 2002, Jason Greene wrote: > > > Instead of just committing a gigantic patch to solve these problems, and > > redefine the extensions behavior, I decided to open a thread for > > discussion on how I intend to solve all

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets Extension Rework (API, etc...) VERY LONG

Hey Jason, On 20 Feb 2002, Jason Greene wrote: > Instead of just committing a gigantic patch to solve these problems, and > redefine the extensions behavior, I decided to open a thread for > discussion on how I intend to solve all the problems. > > My solution does involve modifying pieces of th

[PHP-DEV] Sockets Extension Rework (API, etc...) VERY LONG

To All, While examining a problem pointed out by a sockets extension user I noticed a consistency problem with some of the functions. While working on a simple patch to correct this issue I decided to review the entire module, and I noticed a lot of problems. They can be outlined as follows:

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 04:17:57PM -0500, benjamin yates wrote: > > > The problem with the zip file he sent is also that a: > > > ]$ diff -uN orig new > > > > > > produces a unified diff with almost all of it being whitespace > > > related, so its near impossible to view the change

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

> > The problem with the zip file he sent is also that a: > > ]$ diff -uN orig new > > > > produces a unified diff with almost all of it being whitespace > > related, so its near impossible to view the changes... > > that's what i did;-) hmmm i think it's more a cr/lf thing.

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 07:42:46PM +0100, Sterling Hughes wrote: > > > > please send a unified diff. > > > > i'll look at integrating your changes then! > > > > The problem with the zip file he sent is also that a: > > ]$ diff -uN orig new > > produces a unified diff

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

> > please send a unified diff. > > i'll look at integrating your changes then! > The problem with the zip file he sent is also that a: ]$ diff -uN orig new produces a unified diff with almost all of it being whitespace related, so its near impossible to view the

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

please send a unified diff. i'll look at integrating your changes then! tc On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 08:20:56PM -0500, benjamin yates wrote: > > hey all... i've been using the sockets extension pretty extensively for > the past couple months, and it has some real problems. ob

[PHP-DEV] sockets problems & patch

hey all... i've been using the sockets extension pretty extensively for the past couple months, and it has some real problems. obviously the best reason for it is the ability to use non-blocking sockets in php, which is great for writing simple tcpip clients and services. i've done this with

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets issues ?

re not complete because of the 128bytes limited fgets and there PHP hangs, browser keep waiting for the end of the page ... what troubles did you have with 4.0.6 and how did you fix it ? Thanks again Arnauld - Original Message - From: "Leo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets issues ?

On Thursday 26 July 2001 18:06, Arnauld Dravet - smurfie wrote: > > Then i tried that: > $sock_tab = socket_get_status($sock); > if ($sock_tab["unread_bytes"] >= 0) > { >$a_lire = true; >while ($a_lire) >{ > $bytes_left = $sock_tab["unread_bytes"]; > print("Reading from the s

[PHP-DEV] sockets issues ?

Dear Developpers :) I have to developp a web page on which i need to connect to a game server, to send and grab some informations. The server used is coded in C++, with borland C++ Builder, and so it runs under Windows, and i don't have the source, but i know the protocol it uses, so i can commun

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets

On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 11:32:24PM +0200, Markus Fischer wrote : > On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:20:35PM -0400, colin mcdonald wrote : > > Are the php socket functions still as experimental as indicated in the > > manual? > > They are still experimental and function names/parameter orders > is st

Re: [PHP-DEV] Sockets

On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:20:35PM -0400, colin mcdonald wrote : > Are the php socket functions still as experimental as indicated in the > manual? They are still experimental and function names/parameter orders is still subject to change. Recently there was also a thread about some possible u

[PHP-DEV] Sockets

Hey, I appologize ahead of time if this is the wrong forum for this question. Are the php socket functions still as experimental as indicated in the manual? Are they stable on windows and standard distros of linux? tia, colin -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubs

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Stig Venaas wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:48:06AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote: > >>Well, it probably could be done anyway (abstract it another step). >>However, I don't see it really being that beneficial. The socket >>functions provide *low level* access to the system socket features.

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:48:06AM -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote: > Well, it probably could be done anyway (abstract it another step). > However, I don't see it really being that beneficial. The socket > functions provide *low level* access to the system socket features. > There's no real point

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Daniel Beulshausen wrote: > At 21:23 16.05.2001 +0100, Wez Furlong wrote: > >> I'm not sure that the sockets extension would benefit from php_streams as >> much as php_streams would benefit from the sockets extension, if you see >> what I mean. >> >> I would like to see it using php_streams, as

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

At 21:23 16.05.2001 +0100, Wez Furlong wrote: >I'm not sure that the sockets extension would benefit from php_streams as >much as php_streams would benefit from the sockets extension, if you see >what I mean. > >I would like to see it using php_streams, as that would result in PHP being >much more

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

At 10:34 PM 5/16/2001 +0200, Daniel Beulshausen wrote: >At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: >>Daniel, >> >>Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this >>extension? >>It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you >>fixing any remaining

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

I don't appear to have seen/received the rest of this thread, so please pardon any mistakes in advance... On 2001-05-16 20:49:30, "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this > extension? > It might give php_streams a push and

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: >Daniel, > >Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this >extension? >It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you >fixing any remaining issues. >It would be a nice test bed. >What do you think? > >A

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

At 04:01 16.05.2001 -0400, Sterling Hughes wrote: >I've been meaning for a while to do this, so yes, that's perfectly ok. > >I don't quite understand "the return values of most functions had to be >changed because win32 has a completely different error handling". Can you >elaborate a bit more.

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

At 22:49 16.05.2001 +0300, Andi Gutmans wrote: >Daniel, > >Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this >extension? >It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you >fixing any remaining issues. >It would be a nice test bed. >What do you think? tha

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Daniel Beulshausen wrote: > > > hi, > > i've updated the sockets extension so that it's usable under win32 as > well, however it's incompatible to the "old extension" for some reasons > (thats why i want some feedback): > sockets fd under win32 are usigned, the previous approach of returning

Re: [PHP-DEV] sockets extension

Daniel, Would it make sense to try to integrate the new php_streams into this extension? It might give php_streams a push and I'm sure Wez would work with you fixing any remaining issues. It would be a nice test bed. What do you think? About backwards compatibility, without having read the cod

[PHP-DEV] sockets extension

hi, i've updated the sockets extension so that it's usable under win32 as well, however it's incompatible to the "old extension" for some reasons (thats why i want some feedback): sockets fd under win32 are usigned, the previous approach of returning long's and check for < 0 wouldn't have wo