At 19:06 12-08-01, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I don't think that this happens too often - I think that comments like
Sebastian's are much more
Ick, Sterling's that is. Sorry Sebastian ;)
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List http://www.php.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 19:06 12-08-01, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I don't think that this happens too often - I think that comments like
Sebastian's are much more
Ick, Sterling's that is. Sorry Sebastian ;)
Just to clarify -- I don't think the issue should be ignored --
At 14:03 13-08-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
Just to clarify -- I don't think the issue should be ignored -- I
just feel that php-dev@ is not the appropriate place for such stuff.
Take it up on group@, or find some place else to deal with it
(or perhaps another developer meeting
away. An app built on a certain infrastructure is dependant on that
infrastructure, but not the other way around.
You wrongly assume that the API is equal to the
implementation. PHP can use an API which is completely
independent of the Zend engine.
However, if everyone on
At 17:08 10-08-01, Sascha Schumann wrote:
away. An app built on a certain infrastructure is dependant on that
infrastructure, but not the other way around.
You wrongly assume that the API is equal to the
implementation. PHP can use an API which is completely
independent of
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Is this really what the goal is here? It seems like a contest to see how
many times Zend can appear in the code. I think some of this stuff
should be PHP_ or for things that really are engine related, perhaps
ENGINE_ to at least pretend that this
Is this really what the goal is here? It seems like a contest to see how
many times Zend can appear in the code. I think some of this stuff
should be PHP_ or for things that really are engine related, perhaps
ENGINE_ to at least pretend that this is a modular architecture where if
someone
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Nope, this renaming stuff doesn't sit well with me either.
This is not about renaming, it's about removing duplicate macro's. That is
good IMO. But if all PHP_ stuff should be removed infavor of the ZEND_
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about renaming, it's about removing duplicate macro's.
Of course it's about renaming. We used to have just PHP_* macros and
then Zeev added the ZEND_* versions and now PHP_* ones are just aliased
to ZEND_* ones for backwards
At 09:18 AM 8/10/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Is this really what the goal is here? It seems like a contest to see how
many times Zend can appear in the code. I think some of this stuff
should be PHP_ or for things that really are engine
At 09:31 AM 8/10/2001 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about renaming, it's about removing duplicate macro's.
Of course it's about renaming. We used to have just PHP_* macros and
then Zeev added the ZEND_* versions and now PHP_* ones are
Guys,
It's really simple, even trivial soft-dev issue, which is discussed in a
completely broken manner, because you pour politics into the picture.
The Zend Engine is the infrastructure of PHP. Until there's another
engine, which is nowhere at sight nor is there any good reason to have one,
At 17:31 10-08-01, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about renaming, it's about removing duplicate macro's.
Of course it's about renaming. We used to have just PHP_* macros and
then Zeev added the ZEND_* versions and now PHP_* ones are just
13 matches
Mail list logo
