This feature request (which seems worth doing) has sat on the back burner
awhile. Probably because, in the words of one commenter, those who can
produce the patch are just using regex instead.
I've got an implementation put together, the patch for which can be viewed
at:
I've got an implementation put together, the patch for which can be
viewed at:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff.txt
After some comments on IRC, here's an alternate version to the above
patch. This second approach avoids creating php_memnstri by simply
searching through a copy of
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote:
I've got an implementation put together, the patch for which can be
viewed at:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff.txt
After some comments on IRC, here's an alternate version to the above
patch. This second approach avoids creating
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote:
I've got an implementation put together, the patch for which can be
viewed at:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff.txt
After some comments on IRC, here's an alternate version to the above
patch. This second approach
I may be wrong since I haven't profiled this, but my understanding is
that str_replace is much faster than doing either of the regex
replacements. For that reason alone, there is a use for it.
Normally it would be quite faster, however once case sensitivity is added to
the mix I believe the
I may be wrong since I haven't profiled this, but my understanding is
that str_replace is much faster than doing either of the regex
replacements. For that reason alone, there is a use for it.
Normally it would be quite faster, however once case sensitivity is
added to the mix I believe
I suggest to check out
http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/navarro01fast.html
The presented BNDM algorithm is one of the fastest string
searching algorithm while being easy to implement. Its main
loop is faster than the naive str_replace implementation(*).
Check out a C test
On a related topic, the 'boyer' option of str_replace isn't even
documented. That alternate method of performing str_replaces look like
it's a bit more efficient (no benchmarkes atm) but I'm wondering if
there's a specific reasons why it wasn't documented yet.
The BM algorithm is
Ilia A. wrote:
I may be wrong since I haven't profiled this, but my understanding is
that str_replace is much faster than doing either of the regex
replacements. For that reason alone, there is a use for it.
Normally it would be quite faster, however once case sensitivity is added to
the mix
whoops, missent just to sascha instead of list...
On a related topic, the 'boyer' option of str_replace isn't even
documented. That alternate method of performing str_replaces look
like it's a bit more efficient (no benchmarkes atm) but I'm wondering
if there's a specific reasons why it
I'd tip my hat towards implementing it. Pollita has a good point on
consistency and for those who don't know regex's.
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote:
I may be wrong since I haven't profiled this, but my understanding is
that str_replace is much faster than doing either of the regex
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 06:48, Ilia A. wrote:
I may be wrong since I haven't profiled this, but my understanding is
that str_replace is much faster than doing either of the regex
replacements. For that reason alone, there is a use for it.
Normally it would be quite faster, however once case
Gah.
I botched that, I didn't reset the timer.
Total Time: 00:00:03.08 //str_replace
Total Time: 00:00:04.32 //preg_replace
Total Time: 00:00:03.05 //str_replace
Total Time: 00:00:03.67 //preg_replace
Total Time: 00:00:03.27 //str_replace
Total Time: 00:00:04.40 //preg_replace
Closer than I
On January 29, 2003 04:35 pm, Shane Caraveo wrote:
What's the benchmark code? How is the benchmark difference on large
text (ie. 100K of text) vs. small text (1K or smaller)?
Attached is the benchmark script that I've used. I've intentionally used
'small' strings, since that is what I imagine
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:09, Ilia A. wrote:
On January 29, 2003 04:35 pm, Shane Caraveo wrote:
What's the benchmark code? How is the benchmark difference on large
text (ie. 100K of text) vs. small text (1K or smaller)?
Attached is the benchmark script that I've used. I've intentionally used
better and better...
Ilia offered up an optimized version of php_str_to_str which skips string
resizing and handles do-no-work scenarios up front.
I've made necessary changes to make this case_optional and made a new patch:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff-4.txt
as well as posting
I don't even see the speed difference as an issue as much as (A)
simplicity for the user who hasn't figured out regex yet, (B) consistency
(we have 'i' versions of most other string functions, why not this one?)
+1 for the reasons stated above.
Edin
--
PHP Development Mailing List
At 00:47 30.01.2003, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
I don't even see the speed difference as an issue as much as (A)
simplicity for the user who hasn't figured out regex yet, (B) consistency
(we have 'i' versions of most other string functions, why not this one?)
+1 for the reasons stated above.
+1
better and better...
One last optimization to save memcpys when needle_len == str_len (thanks
again ilia):
Actual Patch:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff-5.txt
Resultant string.c for easy reading:
http://169.229.139.97/test/string-5.c
I've heard enough Ayes over Nays (here, in
One last optimization to save memcpys when needle_len == str_len (thanks
again ilia):
Actual Patch:
http://169.229.139.97/test/str_ireplace.diff-5.txt
Resultant string.c for easy reading:
http://169.229.139.97/test/string-5.c
I've heard enough Ayes over Nays (here, in bugs.php.net, and
T. Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:21 PM
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: Auto Include a Function
Hi,
Please accept my apologies in advance if this is not the correct place
for this request.
This may exist, but I haven't been able to find
Hi,
Please accept my apologies in advance if this is not the correct place
for this request.
This may exist, but I haven't been able to find it, and I think it would
be REALLY helpful and convenient.
The idea is this:
When you write a script and call a function:
?php
$whatever =
, like C
does searching through .h files, but since its not I don't think its a good
idea.
Andrew
- Original Message -
From: Brian T. Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 8:21 PM
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: Auto Include a Function
Hi
From: Andrew Brampton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: Auto Include a Function
I'm not a PHP Developer but I see a few problems with this.
I'm not a PHP Developer either, but I use it 12 hours a day in my work
, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: Auto Include a Function
I'm not a PHP Developer but I see a few problems with this.
I'm not a PHP Developer either, but I use it 12 hours a day in my work.
Since a PHP script is re-evaluated/compiled on each
execution it would
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Brian T. Allen wrote:
If a hash file were used it would only have to search for the function
once, and even then only in the functions directory (like the include
directory, but specifically for functions). After that the order would
be:
1) Execute the function
2) If
You already have public which you can use instead of var.
I think method would look very nice but I don't think it's worth creating
another reserved word.
Andi
At 01:34 PM 9/28/2002 -0600, Lamont R. Peterson wrote:
All:
I can't hardly wait for PHP 4.3 (Zend 2.0) to hit the streets. I can't
On the surface, it sounds like a good idea but underneath the semantic change is
fraught with logical inconsistencies.
A method is specifically a function declared within a class context. A static
method is a static function declared within a class context.
A method by itself has no meaning and
-
From: Shamim Islam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 8:48 PM
To: Lamont R. Peterson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature request -- feedback welcomed.
On the surface, it sounds like a good idea but underneath the semantic
change is
fraught
All:
I can't hardly wait for PHP 4.3 (Zend 2.0) to hit the streets. I can't
express how anxiously I've been waiting for the class model to be reworked.
Great job!
I would, however, like to see a couple of simple additions to the planned
release (if these are already coming, then I just
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Lamont R. Peterson wrote:
All:
I can't hardly wait for PHP 4.3 (Zend 2.0) to hit the streets. I can't
express how anxiously I've been waiting for the class model to be reworked.
Great job!
Uhm... 4.3.0 will not ship with Zend 2.0, that will b ethe honour of PHP
Lamont R. Peterson wrote:
Derek All:
His name is Derick, like the TV inspector.
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift: http://wishlist.sebastian-bergmann.de/
--
PHP Development Mailing List
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 22:23:08 +0200
Sebastian Bergmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
His name is Derick, like the TV inspector.
yup, but he s more funny ;-)
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
His name is Derick, like the TV inspector.
+almost (my bad, http://us.imdb.com/Title?0070981)
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift:
Uhm... 4.3.0 will not ship with Zend 2.0, that will b ethe honour of PHP
5.0.0.
But one can compile Zend 2.0 into PHP 4 - i think Zeev posted an HowTo some
weeks ago.
Regards Sascha
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
, if the
filesystem, the link is created in, is really NTFS.
Timo
-Original Message-
From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Montag, 8. Juli 2002 08:05
To: Timo Weingärtner
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: [PHP-DEV] FEATURE REQUEST: symlinks under NT
Again, the fact they're
Shell Shortcuts could be used to implement symlink like behaviour, and
it would be compatible on more systems, but it would be a bigger pain to
implement in PHP.
As far as the directory junctions, this is how MS describes them:
# NTFS Directory Junctions. These are NTFS directories that can
(Options FollowSymlinks). It would be nice to have the code
included in PHP.
Thanks in advance, Timo Weingärtner
-Original Message-
From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Samstag, 6. Juli 2002 16:55
To: Timo Weingärtner
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] FEATURE REQUEST
-
From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Samstag, 6. Juli 2002 16:55
To: Timo Weingärtner
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] FEATURE REQUEST: symlinks under NT
Are you sure they're equivalent to symlinks? They only work with
directories as far as I know, which renders them
NTFS supports directory junctions which are equivalent to unix symlinks.
I found a tool that can create, read and delete such junctions.
Is there are posiibility to include that code into php so that it supports
it in realpath(), symlink(), linkinfo(), readlink(), filetype(), is_link(),
stat(),
Is there a portable way to implement this on all/most OS'es?
Please submit this feature request on bugs.php.net.
- Stig
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 23:06, veins wrote:
hi,
I have a feature request for the exec() family.
I was thinking of adding a fourth optionnal argument to be passed as
the
hi,
I have a feature request for the exec() family.
I was thinking of adding a fourth optionnal argument to be passed as
the argv[0] so that the name that appears in a 'ps' can be changed.
The reason is simple, as many people do, I usually have php call a
shell script or a perl script on the
Can you take a look on bug #12669 and #14712?
Its about auto-globals user definied variables - ie: user can set some
variables to be global in all scopes, allways global.
Quick link: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=12669
Atenciosamente,
Hi,
http://bugs.php.net/report.php
- Markus
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 06:20:28PM -0600, Steve Meyers wrote :
I just tried ext/shmop, and without even using it, the fact that it is
compiled in to php causes it to segfault on every request.
Here's my ./configure line
Steve Meyers wrote:
Do you need a backtrace of it? If so, how do I do that?
http://www.php.net/manual/en/faq.installation.php#faq.installation.nodata
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker.de/
Did I help you? Consider a gift:
I figured it out, it was a problem in APC that was causing it. Deleting
the compiled PHP files fixed the problem. I have no idea why that fixed
it, but it did.
Markus Fischer wrote:
Hi,
http://bugs.php.net/report.php
- Markus
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 06:20:28PM -0600,
Hi!
What really would be useful for the session module,
is a grouping mechanism for sessions, so i can set up
variable scopes and share variables among different
session:
every session has private variables. that's the way it
works now. i can register a variable to a session
and there's no way
Hi,
I think what you want can (and should) be done with shared
memory, ext/shmop . This way you exchange values as you want
(it's not tied to sessions in anyway, btw).
- Markus
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 11:08:52AM +0200, Michael Virnstein wrote :
Hi!
What really would be
Markus Fischer wrote:
Hi,
I think what you want can (and should) be done with shared
memory, ext/shmop . This way you exchange values as you want
(it's not tied to sessions in anyway, btw).
Markus' method works nicely for single server
It is recommended way.
Try
I just tried ext/shmop, and without even using it, the fact that it is
compiled in to php causes it to segfault on every request.
Here's my ./configure line
./configure --with-mysql=/usr --with-pgsql --enable-ftp --with-ldap
--with-gmp --disable-pear --enable-shmop --enable-apc
I wrote this extension a while back, but I never released it since
I didn't follow coding style and it was my first forage into extension
coding for PHP. It should be what your looking for though for the
most part... the function of usefulness is: get_function_call_stack()
which will return an
Hi,
people fail to understand the reason why to bloat PHP with
just another function which is really just a call to another
function (e.g. preg_*() in PHP.
As for parsing an ini file, this is certainly not true.
Anyway. There were some discussions lately to implement
Hi,
Anyway. There were some discussions lately to implement
something like word_count() and similar friends. Though I
don't remember what has happened, you might want to look it
up in the archive an join the discussion (It was just a week
ago or so I think).
There were
Hi!
Am Wed, 24 Apr 2002 22:15:19 +0200 schrieb Daniel Lorch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
function line_count($string) {
return count(preg_split(/\r?\n/, $string));
}
Why not simply use a substr_count($string, \n)? It works fine for me...
cu, Roland Tapken
--
Please reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
you may be right, but this was only a suggestion.
If you know a better way doing this, no problem.
I thought of something like __FILE__ and __LINE__,
because these constants are easy to use. If we have a function
for this, not a constant, it's also ok for me.
Michael
Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL
A short question on this:
how about __LINE__?
doesn't this also require runtime context or am i wrong?
if so, why it is a constant then, not a function?
Michael
Stig S. Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi,
__FILE__ is compiled into
__LINE__ , __FILE__ (and now __FUNCTION__ __CLASS__) are converted at
compile time into a string - have a look at zend/zend_language_scanner.l
for more details.
regards
alan
Michael Virnstein wrote:
A short question on this:
how about __LINE__?
doesn't this also require runtime context or
It would be great if there was a function in the filesystem family similar
to the unix command wc. It'd be nice to not have to write simple wrappers
around system calls or creating arrays to get the number of words or lines
in a file.
For example, to get the number of lines in a file, I have to
It would be really useful for writing functions/Classes, if
i were able to determine the __FILE__ and __LINE__ of the
script, that is calling my function, without the need to send
__FILE__ and __LINE__ as parameter to my function.
E.g. __CFILE__ for calling script and __CLINE__ for line in the
Hello Michael,
I'm working (80% done) on an extension for this. It should be finished in
a few days. It doesn't feature the __C*__ things yet, but I can add a
function for that too.
I'll keep you posted,
Derick
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Michael Virnstein wrote:
It would be really useful for
wow...your fast! :)
thanx..that would be really great!
Michael
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hello Michael,
I'm working (80% done) on an extension for this. It should be finished in
a few days. It doesn't feature the __C*__ things yet,
an additional thought:
if __CFILE__ and __CLINE__ are used outside of
a function/method, both should be NULL. and trigger_error
should only overwrite its __FILE__ and __LINE__ settings, if
they are NOT NULL. And if one of the __FILE__ , __LINE parameters
of trigger_error is NOT NULL, both have to
Hi,
It would be great if there was a function in the filesystem family similar
to the unix command wc. It'd be nice to not have to write simple wrappers
around system calls or creating arrays to get the number of words or lines
in a file.
function line_count($string) {
return
$wc = strlen(preg_replace('/\W*\w*/', 'x', file_get_contents($file));
Look, no arrays! :-)
- Stig
On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 20:20, Nikolai Devereaux wrote:
It would be great if there was a function in the filesystem family similar
to the unix command wc. It'd be nice to not have to write
Hi,
$wc = strlen(preg_replace('/\W*\w*/', 'x', file_get_contents($file));
Look, no arrays! :-)
- Stig
is this faster than the array-based solution?
-daniel
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
function line_count($string) {
return count(preg_split(/\r?\n/, $string));
}
function word_count($string) {
return count(preg_split(/\s+/, $string));
}
There will be a PEAR-string class, which includes functions similar to
this. I assigned it to me some days ago and I will be
Addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** Reply to note from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:06:41 +0200 (CEST)
Hello Michael,
I'm working (80% done) on an extension for this. It should be finished in
a few days. It doesn't feature the __C*__ things
Especially when you have such fancy buit-ins like parse_inifile and
pathinfo, and other built in unix commands like touch, chown,
and
chmod.
Here I'm asking myself: what function would be easier for user to
create: counting spaces in a string or parsing the .ini file or touch
and chown?
Hi,
__FILE__ is compiled into a constant string by Zend. You can think of
it as equivalent of putting a string with the filename there instead.
It is constant. __CFILE__ would require runtime context (which function
called us), so it makes no sense as a constant. Derick's xdebug
extension
Here I'm asking myself: what function would be easier for user to
create: counting spaces in a string or parsing the .ini file or touch
and chown?
Parsing an INI file isn't difficult. It requires the same amount of
knowledge to do as counting spaces or lines, albeit with a bunch more
This isn't planned for Engine 2 but you could use:
list($year) = localtime($time);
Andi
At 03:17 20/04/2002 +0200, Markus Fischer wrote:
I've brought this up on the Zend Engine2 list a while ago.
The result was that it is not planned to support
dereferencing of arrays from
I've been playin' around with Horde and IMP lately... And I've done a lot of
PHP and Perl work in the past... One of the things I really like about PHP is
how it has most of the really cool features of Perl that I enjoy, but lacks
some of the things that annoy me about Perl.
I was making
I've brought this up on the Zend Engine2 list a while ago.
The result was that it is not planned to support
dereferencing of arrays from e.g. return value on the fly.
- Markus
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 07:26:26PM -0500, Derek Moore wrote :
I've been playin' around with Horde and
Hi -
I'd like to ask that the pcre_match*() functions be modified such that
they can also return position info on where the match(s) occured, akin to
Perl's pos() I think this would be a very useful addition, plus it
requires minimal code changes since the actual function, php_pcre_match()
Hello,
can you please post a unified diff (diff -u)? That's much more readable
regards,
Derick
On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, 'Ricky' S Dhatt wrote:
Hi -
I'd like to ask that the pcre_match*() functions be modified such that
they can also return position info on where the match(s) occured, akin to
Hi Jaroslaw!
On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Jaroslaw Kolakowski wrote:
But, even if we don't agree with his opinion on templates, what about
the features that libxml provides which are currently unused by PHP,
including HTML 4.01-support (I don't know exactly what libxml can do)?
Are there any
Can you tell more on what that patch is about and it's availability?
Look at http://rainbow.mimuw.edu.pl/~jkolakow/domxml/
Regards,
Jaroslaw Kolakowski
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
hi,
has anybody ever thought about supporting HTML 4.01 in
the DOMXML extension as Gnome libxml supports it anyway?
should be a relatively simple addon, yet extremely useful for
processing layout templates and finally killing the long thread
of discussion on the brain-dead text-substituting
On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Lauri Liinat wrote:
hi,
has anybody ever thought about supporting HTML 4.01 in
the DOMXML extension as Gnome libxml supports it anyway?
should be a relatively simple addon, yet extremely useful for
processing layout templates and finally killing the long thread
of
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
there's no point in using a home-brewn scripting language
to do those tasks, is there? all the constructs are already part
of the php language...
Are you aware of the concept of domain-specific languages?
There is a point.
Are you done?
I'm definately with you
On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Alexander Wagner wrote:
But, even if we don't agree with his opinion on templates, what about
the features that libxml provides which are currently unused by PHP,
including HTML 4.01-support (I don't know exactly what libxml can do)?
Are there any plans to make them
But, even if we don't agree with his opinion on templates, what about
the features that libxml provides which are currently unused by PHP,
including HTML 4.01-support (I don't know exactly what libxml can do)?
Are there any plans to make them accessible from PHP? It definately
would be
I hope this is the right place for this. If not, please refer me to the
proper place. :)
Are there any plans to have PHP support the option of showing line numbers
for PHP Source (.phps) display?
This would be a great feature to add to your list if it is not already
planned.
--
Ray A. Akey /
That is the only thing that I see of any real use as well. I was just
humoring Andi and his idea that we would soon be requesting that feature of
knowing which one failed the test.
I was really voting no for the original feature - just returning true or
false - unless it can be shown (and
(X) Extend the isset() and empty() functions to encompass multiple
variables as one inclusive logic test.
( ) Don't touch my beloved functionality vile creatures!
-Chris
From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] feature request
It should be possible to do this.
Phil is right. The only thing that may be both useful and practical would
be isset() on multiple variables, returning either true or false.
Zeev
At 11:31 19/3/2001, Phil Driscoll wrote:
$a = 1;
$b = 2;
$d = 4;
$play_nice = isSet($a, $b, $c, $d);
if (!$play_nice) {
print "The
ot;Gavin Sherry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Cameron" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
hi,
better write you own checker in php... and implement and/or...
here is a sample :-)))
?
function isset_and() {
$numargs=func_num
-04 aM
To: Phil Driscoll
Cc: Chris Newbill; Andi Gutmans; PHP DEV
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
Phil is right. The only thing that may be both useful and
practical would
be isset() on multiple variables, returning either true or false.
Zeev
At 11:31 19/3/2001, Phil Driscoll
Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 19 March, 2001 7-04 aM
To: Phil Driscoll
Cc: Chris Newbill; Andi Gutmans; PHP DEV
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
Phil is right. The only thing that may be both useful and
practical would
be isset() on multiple variables
Newbill; Andi Gutmans; PHP DEV
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
Phil is right. The only thing that may be both useful and
practical would
be isset() on multiple variables, returning either true or false.
Zeev
At 11:31 19/3/2001, Phil Driscoll wrote:
$a = 1;
$b = 2
My earlier post to the list doesn't seem to have arrived yet, so here it is
again. You'll note from the posting that I'm not keen on the patch staying
in. There are considerable efforts being made by several of us on the QA
team trying to make the language more orthogonal, and this kind of ad hoc
At 07:58 PM 3/19/2001 +, Phil Driscoll wrote:
My earlier post to the list doesn't seem to have arrived yet, so here it is
again. You'll note from the posting that I'm not keen on the patch staying
in. There are considerable efforts being made by several of us on the QA
team trying to make the
t;Chris Newbill" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Zeev Suraski" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Andi
Gutmans" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "PHP DEV" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
My earlier post to the list doesn't seem to have a
TECTED]; "Andi Gutmans" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "PHP DEV" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
My earlier post to the list doesn't seem to have arrived yet, so here it is
again. You'll note from
raski" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "PHP DEV" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
Ugh, that's exactly what I didn't want to get into. If you want an array of
results you're better of doing a few if() statements. It's faster and
; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "PHP DEV" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
My earlier post to the list doesn't seem to have arrived yet, so here it is
again. You'll note from the posting that I'm not keen on the patch stayi
At 22:41 19/3/2001, Jason Greene wrote:
I don't, but I could see that viewpoint where Phil is coming from when he
talks about the fact
that functions can end up with 2 different goals, and then when we want to
enhance them
we end up with multiple behaviors in a single function and way too many
Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 19 March, 2001 1-12 pM
To: Jason Greene; Phil Driscoll; Chris Newbill; Zeev Suraski
Cc: PHP DEV
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] feature request
Ugh, that's exactly what I didn't want to get into. If you want
an array of
results you're better of doing a few
Zeev said:
Define 'change their behavior' though?
'change their behavior' === 'change their behavior' in a subtle way :)
Almost all SQL functions take an
optional argument which is the link id. That is by design, and doesn't
really mean anything here,
I'm not saying it does mean anything
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:27:09PM +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote:
What is iseverythingelse()? I don't think we have any other
iseverythingelse() function.
I'd assume Lars is referring to the is_{type} functions:
http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.var.php
--
Jon Parise ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
