You should be using ZEND_EXTENSION_API_NO, it's an integer.
Zeev
At 23:32 8/5/2001, Dan Libby wrote:
ok, so ZEND_VERSION_DOUBLE is crazy talk. the preprocessor doesn't like floats
either. But something like ZEND_VERSION_MAJOR 4, ZEND_VERSION_MINOR 6 would
satisfy it.
-danda
Dan Libby wrote:
DL be buildable with all of 4.x without user intervention, so I'm trying
DL to figure out some way to handle the change via the pre-processor.
Use ZEND_EXTENSION_API_NO, it changes every time API changes so that
extensions may break.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
[EMAIL
This change also broke my extension. I'd like to have the extension
be buildable with all of 4.x without user intervention, so I'm trying
to figure out some way to handle the change via the pre-processor.
I thought that ZEND_VERSION, defined in zend.h, might do the trick.
Unfortunately, it is
ok, so ZEND_VERSION_DOUBLE is crazy talk. the preprocessor doesn't like floats
either. But something like ZEND_VERSION_MAJOR 4, ZEND_VERSION_MINOR 6 would
satisfy it.
-danda
Dan Libby wrote:
This change also broke my extension. I'd like to have the extension
be buildable with all of 4.x
There is a ZEND_MODULE_API_NO
Andi
At 01:32 PM 5/8/2001 -0700, Dan Libby wrote:
ok, so ZEND_VERSION_DOUBLE is crazy talk. the preprocessor doesn't like floats
either. But something like ZEND_VERSION_MAJOR 4, ZEND_VERSION_MINOR 6 would
satisfy it.
-danda
Dan Libby wrote:
This change also
[Björn Schotte [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
* Zeev Suraski wrote:
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
I don't understand why people should work in their spare-time
on a tool which is published under the Zend Licence (which is
similar to QPL). As we
[Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
At 21:05 4/5/2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
PS: about the welcome thing above ...
- you should know that i have put a lot of work into the manual
(both english and german) and the function tables
Hartmut,
I wasn't trying to understate your work
At 11:41 6/5/2001, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
You're not wrong; It's been done and published
(http://www.zend.com/apidoc/), and is the base for additional work
that I invited people to improve on.
Hey, are the sources for this manual available somewhere? CVS maybe?
Yep, sure thing;
You're not wrong; It's been done and published
(http://www.zend.com/apidoc/), and is the base for additional work
that I invited people to improve on.
Hey, are the sources for this manual available somewhere? CVS maybe?
Yep, sure thing; cvs.zend.com, co ZendAPI; Released under
At 14:14 6/5/2001, James Moore wrote:
You're not wrong; It's been done and published
(http://www.zend.com/apidoc/), and is the base for additional work
that I invited people to improve on.
Hey, are the sources for this manual available somewhere? CVS maybe?
Yep, sure
On Sun, 6 May 2001, James Moore wrote:
You're not wrong; It's been done and published
(http://www.zend.com/apidoc/), and is the base for additional work
that I invited people to improve on.
Hey, are the sources for this manual available somewhere? CVS maybe?
Yep, sure
]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 7:26 PM
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Zend API changes
Billy:
Meet the QA team :) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Billy Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 7:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV
Brian Foddy wrote:
... and get better notified when they do occur?
they have occured on every release but 4.0.3 now
so you should expect new releases to *not* be
binary compatible to old extensions for now IMHO
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.six.de +49-711-99091-77
--
It's in everyone's interest to keep the API intact. The Zend API is now
fairly stable (I don't expect compatibility breaking changes in the 4.0
line); Judging from the experience of PHP 3.0, there too, the API
stabilized around x.0.5.
Zeev
At 18:29 4/5/2001, Brian Foddy wrote:
A small
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
It's in everyone's interest to keep the API intact. The Zend API is now
fairly stable (I don't expect compatibility breaking changes in the 4.0
line); Judging from the experience of PHP 3.0, there too, the API
Sterling Hughes wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
so we can now hope for a reference documentation now? ;)
Sure, go ahead and write some! ;)
AFAIR someone told someone else not to do so (a long time ago)
as this was already taken care of ;)
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe [EMAIL
Hope is always a good thing :)
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
Zeev
At 19:30 4/5/2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
It's in everyone's interest to keep the API intact. The Zend API is now
fairly stable (I don't expect
* Zeev Suraski wrote:
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
I don't understand why people should work in their spare-time
on a tool which is published under the Zend Licence (which is
similar to QPL). As we know of QPL, all developer's seem to
be
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
I don't understand why people should work in their spare-time
on a tool which is published under the Zend Licence (which is
similar to QPL). As we know of QPL, all developer's seem to
be equal, but some
* James Moore wrote:
And the point of this other than trying to start a flame war was Bjorn?
I'm not starting a flame war.
Björn.
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the
* James Moore wrote:
And the point of this other than trying to start a flame war was Bjorn?
I'm not starting a flame war.
I just didnt understand what your comments possibly had to do with the Zend
API docs. AFIAK they arnt QPL'd (and if they are it doesnt really matter
although they
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Hope is always a good thing :)
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
besides all political/philosophical issues (licensing and such ...)
i am talking about a *reference* documentation, not a manual or howto
neither the book
At 20:20 4/5/2001, Björn Schotte wrote:
* Zeev Suraski wrote:
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
I don't understand why people should work in their spare-time
on a tool which is published under the Zend Licence (which is
similar to QPL). As we
Well you should, damnit!
;-)
Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
At 20:20 4/5/2001, Björn Schotte wrote:
* Zeev Suraski wrote:
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
I don't understand why
At 21:05 4/5/2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
PS: about the welcome thing above ...
- you should know that i have put a lot of work into the manual
(both english and german) and the function tables
Hartmut,
I wasn't trying to understate your work on the manual; I told you
personally that
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Hope is always a good thing :)
There's a good starting point already, people are more than welcome to
extend it.
besides all political/philosophical issues (licensing and such ...)
i am talking about a *reference*
On Fri, 04 May 2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
Well maybe not manpage style. I think there should be some Javadoc-like
comments in the Zend source, the same way the apache portable runtime is
documented or state threads library is (yeah, yeah, I know, don't end
sentences with prepositions :).
On 2001-05-04 19:59:23, Andrei Zmievski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
Well maybe not manpage style. I think there should be some
Javadoc-like
comments in the Zend source, the same way the apache portable runtime
is
I remember the Amiga coding
Sterling Hughes wrote:
neither the book chapter you defined to be the official documentation
nor the readme files describe the complete api
e.g. it's very hard to get the clue what all the *FETCH macros are good
for from the so called official documentation
do you still need an
Holzgraefe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Zend API changes
At 21:05 4/5/2001, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
PS: about the welcome thing above ...
- you should know that i have put a lot of work into the manual
(both
Message -
From: Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Billy Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Zend API changes
You can always suggest... :)
At 02:14 5/5/2001, Billy Rose wrote:
The company I work for has a very quick bug turn over
Billy:
Meet the QA team :) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Billy Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 7:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Zend API changes
It is obvious that this project has a tremendous amount of
effort
-
From: Zeev Suraski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Billy Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Zend API changes
You can always suggest... :)
At 02:14 5/5/2001, Billy Rose wrote:
The company I work for has a very quick bug
33 matches
Mail list logo
