On Saturday 04 August 2001 22:06, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
> Say PHP had a function to put it in "portable mode" changing the
> behaviour of a few functions. Then for example PEAR classes would
> have to deal with running both with and without this mode, since the
> user can enable or disable i
[Phil Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> On Saturday 04 August 2001 08:49, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
> > [Phil Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> >
> > With such a php_portability() function, it would be _even_ harder to
> > write portable library code (because you need to handle both
> > settings). Tw
On Saturday 04 August 2001 15:03, André Næss wrote:
>
> I don't like the idea of a function like this, I think it's much more
> important to educate people on how they write portable PHP code (to the
> extent possible).
That is my point really - what constitutes 'portable code' has changed quite
> -Original Message-
> [Phil Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > My thought was that it may be possible to get rid of some of the
> > portability issues by implementing a new function php_portability()
> > which takes TRUE or FALSE arguments to turn it on or off.
> >
> > The idea is that
On Saturday 04 August 2001 08:49, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
> [Phil Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>
> With such a php_portability() function, it would be _even_ harder to
> write portable library code (because you need to handle both
> settings). Two wrongs won't make this one right. :-)
>
Please
[Phil Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> I was going to send a post on this topic yesterday, but then I
> deleted it, but maybe it is worth airing incase it prompts someone
> whose brain is working better than mine was yesterday to rifine the
> idea.
>
> My thought was that it may be possible to get
