At 08:38 02/08/2001, Thies C. Arntzen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 07:09:35AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
zeev Thu Aug 2 09:16:20 2001 EDT
Modified files:
/Zend zend.c zend_execute_API.c zend_hash.c zend_hash.h
On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 07:09:35AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
zeev Thu Aug 2 09:16:20 2001 EDT
Modified files:
/Zend zend.c zend_execute_API.c zend_hash.c zend_hash.h zend_list.c
zend_list.h
Log:
It should be fairly easy to support both codebases by just defining the
right things depending on the API_NO. At any rate, whether we call it 4.1
or 4.0.7 doesn't really matter. It had to be done, and would involve the
same kind of issues regardless of the name.
Zeev
At 06:47 02/08/2001,
At 10:40 02/08/2001, Jani Taskinen wrote:
True. So you're saying that the people who write extensions should also
be following [EMAIL PROTECTED] to know about any major changes?
I guess most of them are; Those who aren't will bump into these issues as
soon as they try to upgrade. It's not
The work which will have to be done is the author, not all of the
users. So the 10K number is not all that relevant.
At 10:50 02/08/2001, George Schlossnagle wrote:
Yes, I was counting those too... It's still not a very large number
(probably in the range of dozens, or hundreds at the
