Michael A. Peters wrote:
[anip]
> and you can use DOMDocument to completely
> construct the page before sending it to the browser - allowing you to
> translate xhtml to html for browsers that don't properly support
> xhtml+xml.
I suspect you meant "translate xml to html"? I publish everything in
Paul M Foster wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 01:39:51PM -0800, Daevid Vincent wrote:
http://startuplessonslearned.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-php-won.html
I *like* the way this guy thinks.
Paul
It was a decent page.
Point #2 though - you can use mod_rewrite to do wonders with respect to
ur
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 01:39:51PM -0800, Daevid Vincent wrote:
> http://startuplessonslearned.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-php-won.html
>
I *like* the way this guy thinks.
Paul
--
Paul M. Foster
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.p
On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 20:23 -0500, Sean DeNigris wrote:
> lol, neither. It was from a site I had coded. I read an article
> about session fixation and it seemed vulnerable based on what I read,
> but when I tested it, it didn't seem to be and I wasn't sure why.
> What made you think that?
>
lol, neither. It was from a site I had coded. I read an article
about session fixation and it seemed vulnerable based on what I read,
but when I tested it, it didn't seem to be and I wasn't sure why.
What made you think that?
- Sean
On Feb 16, 2009, at 8:16 PM, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
On
On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 13:49 -0500, Sean DeNigris wrote:
> Hi all! The following code seems like it should be open to session
> fixation attacks, but is not. Why?!
>
> This is the beginning of the private page...
> session_start();
> if (!isset($_SESSION['user']))
> {
> header("Location:
Hi,
> The From header shouldn't have " in at all, not even escaped as you've
> done. It should be a valid email address only, and I'm not entirely sure
> that " in email addresses are allowed in most email systems/clients, so
> it will cause problems.
Sure it can. It denotes a quoted string. Like
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 18:43 +0200, Bulend Kolay wrote:
> Thanks to Bastien
> I think, I wrote wrong the expression
> I have entered the string again as below
> $headers .= "From: \"Site Admin\" \n";
>
> the mail comes as html and also server name at from part doesn't appear.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Ok
Thanks to Bastien
I think, I wrote wrong the expression
I have entered the string again as below
$headers .= "From: \"Site Admin\" \n";
the mail comes as html and also server name at from part doesn't appear.
Ok it works. it comes as html, But it comes with servername at From
part.
That'
Ok it works. it comes as html,
But it comes with servername at From part.
That's to say, I get the mail no-re...@sitename.com@full.servername.com
How can I conceal the servername at the From part ?
Thanks
2009/2/4 Bulend Kolay
I attached my code
Thanks
Show your code, but it sou
2009/2/4 Bulend Kolay
> I attached my code
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
> Show your code, but it sounds like maybe the HTML flag is not set.
>> Consider using a class like phpmailer or the mime mail class from
>> phpclasses.org
>>
>> Bastien
>>
>> Sent from my iPod
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:28, "Bulend Ko
I attached my code
Thanks
Show your code, but it sounds like maybe the HTML flag is not set.
Consider using a class like phpmailer or the mime mail class from
phpclasses.org
Bastien
Sent from my iPod
On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:28, "Bulend Kolay" wrote:
I use php-5.2.6 and apache2.2.x on
Show your code, but it sounds like maybe the HTML flag is not set.
Consider using a class like phpmailer or the mime mail class from
phpclasses.org
Bastien
Sent from my iPod
On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:28, "Bulend Kolay" wrote:
I use php-5.2.6 and apache2.2.x on opensuse11
I have a file called
2009/2/4 Bulend Kolay :
> I use php-5.2.6 and apache2.2.x on opensuse11
>
> I have a file called mailsend.php to send a mail of html format.
> the server sends the mail form of html format. But I get it as text instead
> of html.
> default_mimetype is set as text/html in php.ini file.
>
> How can I
On 2 Dec 2008, at 20:15, ann kok wrote:
The location of the socket is compiled into the mysql lib. I believe
it can be changed from php.ini - check the manual for details. If not
then your easiest option is to create a symlink, or alternatively
recompile the extension.
-Stut
--
http:/
Micah Gersten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is that if you're running on older hardware, IE7 might be
> too CPU intensive to run correctly. That's why MS won't set Sunset
> Dates for an old browser. They instead set the Sunset Dates for the OS
> and that's how they make things ou
Robert Cummings wrote:
>
> I'm calling shenanigans. It was a breeze to setup windows 3.11 WFWG in
> VMWare. There's a VM for almost every old system these days.
Very true, but not every one is a breeze. I've been trying to get to
play "Master Of Magic" on DOS for quite some time. On OS2 it _wa
Luke wrote:
> A friend works in a place where they use pascal as a database
> interface!
Nothing wrong with that - Pascal is a decent language. I know places
that still use APL2 - you need a special keyboard for that. And you'll
probably have to go and look up what it is :-)
http://en.wikipedi
A friend works in a place where they use pascal as a database interface!
Luke Slater
Lead Developer
NuVoo
On 8 Aug 2008, at 16:25, V S Rawat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/8/2008 3:59 AM India Time, _Micah Gersten_ wrote:
You can't steal it, but you can't do anything with it either, so
wha
On 8/8/2008 3:59 AM India Time, _Micah Gersten_ wrote:
You can't steal it, but you can't do anything with it either, so what's
the point of having it?
They are getting it printed and processing the printed hard copy
further. That's all.
They even have full fledged working programs (say, in
On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 17:29 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> You can't steal it, but you can't do anything with it either, so what's
> the point of having it?
>
>
> V S Rawat wrote:
> >
> > I was surprised to see some very busy and well to do Chartered
> > Accountants, Company Secretaries still usin
You can't steal it, but you can't do anything with it either, so what's
the point of having it?
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
V S Rawat wrote:
>
> I was surprised to see some very busy and well to do Chartered
> Accountants, Company Secretar
On 8/7/2008 7:42 PM India Time, _Judson Vaughn_ wrote:
Kudos to Richard.
If its fixed, don't break it.
Jud.
==
Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
Migrat
Kudos to Richard.
If its fixed, don't break it.
Jud.
==
Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
Migration issues for instance - we have quite a bit of code th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
n3or wrote:
> Compatibility to older Software of the hosters and sloth of the developers
>
> Richard Heyes schrieb:
>> I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
>> years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
Don't lu
Per Jessen wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> Some ISP's are still only supporting rather ancient versions of PHP4.
>> They should simply be warned of the security risks. Some ISP's have a
>> PHP5 offering, but again an older version simply because it causes
>> less problems when converting from PH
This one time, at band camp, "Richard Heyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
> years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
I asked that question and was called a troll...
Kevin
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.
Jason Pruim wrote:
>
> On Jul 30, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Micah Gersten wrote:
>
>> Sometimes speed improvements require removing things. If you end up
>> backwards supporting everything you end up with a big monster engine
>> that is incredibly slow.
>
>
> Just ask Microsoft about that ;)
Better
On Jul 30, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Micah Gersten wrote:
Sometimes speed improvements require removing things. If you end up
backwards supporting everything you end up with a big monster engine
that is incredibly slow.
Just ask Microsoft about that ;)
--
Jason Pruim
Raoset Inc.
Technology Mana
Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
I agree but not everyone think in the sameway. I have seen several
big websites that got hit because they haven't used super globals in
the code and their hosting provided would just change the PHP.ini
setting and nothing would work.
Well if it's a "big"
Because,
People believes
Do not fix until broke
Motto.
Testing new online application may painfull.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Sometimes speed improvements require removing things. If you end up
backwards supporting everything you end up with a big monster engine
that is incredibly slow.
Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com
Hélio Rocha wrote:
> Brainfuck rox! LOL :)
>
> S
Sometimes deprecation is necessary is a language feature is created out
of necessity but is superseded by a superior language form.
A great example is the HTML FONT tag. Font tags slow down downloads and
renderings, and were deprecated in favor of CSS style sheets which offer
much more control and
Per Jessen wrote:
Lester Caine wrote:
Some ISP's are still only supporting rather ancient versions of PHP4.
They should simply be warned of the security risks. Some ISP's have a
PHP5 offering, but again an older version simply because it causes
less problems when converting from PHP4.
The pr
Lester Caine wrote:
> Some ISP's are still only supporting rather ancient versions of PHP4.
> They should simply be warned of the security risks. Some ISP's have a
> PHP5 offering, but again an older version simply because it causes
> less problems when converting from PHP4.
The problem for an I
Richard Heyes wrote:
>> Umm, I beg to differ. A developer should not need to worry about a
>> possible/future upgrade of the runtime platform. I certainly don't
>> worry about the next release of gcc or glibc when I write C.
>
> Minor point releases certainly, but not major ones. They're major
Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Heyes wrote:
When U write code, U must not be worried 'bout the next upgrade of
your server!
Of course you should. Writing code with every eventuality in mind is
simply ludicrous.
Umm, I beg to differ. A developer should not need to worry about a
possible/future u
> Umm, I beg to differ. A developer should not need to worry about a
> possible/future upgrade of the runtime platform. I certainly don't
> worry about the next release of gcc or glibc when I write C.
Minor point releases certainly, but not major ones. They're major
upgrades for a reason - thing
Richard Heyes wrote:
>
>> When U write code, U must not be worried 'bout the next upgrade of
>> your server!
>
> Of course you should. Writing code with every eventuality in mind is
> simply ludicrous.
Umm, I beg to differ. A developer should not need to worry about a
possible/future upgrade
Hélio Rocha wrote:
> methods and worst, some hosters didn't know how to virtualize a
> f1ck1n' server with Apache+PHP5.
Despite their many inabilities, I doubt if any hosting service would
have a problem with that.
If you're trying to figure out why so many haven't changed, there's one
question
Brainfuck rox! LOL :)
Sure you must see the changelog and other things but take a look:
I can do more and better things with the next generation of the language in
which i wrote my app, but i don't think that it's fair that my app doens't
compile (if it was a compiled language) or stops executing
> Sorry to disagree,
That's nothing to apologise for.
> But I think that with PHP4 a lot of people start thinking that they could be
> programmers (maybe they can, developers it's another story). When php5 came
> they didn't know how do deal with the deprecated methods and worst, some
> hosters d
Quoting Hélio Rocha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry to disagree,
But I think that with PHP4 a lot of people start thinking that they could be
programmers (maybe they can, developers it's another story). When php5 came
they didn't know how do deal with the deprecated methods and worst, some
hosters d
Sorry to disagree,
But I think that with PHP4 a lot of people start thinking that they could be
programmers (maybe they can, developers it's another story). When php5 came
they didn't know how do deal with the deprecated methods and worst, some
hosters didn't know how to virtualize a f1ck1n' serve
> The technical abilities and awareness is often inversely proportional to
> the size of the hoster.
Lol.
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Richard Heyes wrote:
>> I agree but not everyone think in the sameway. I have seen several
>> big websites that got hit because they haven't used super globals in
>> the code and their hosting provided would just change the PHP.ini
>> setting and nothing would work.
>
> Well if it's a "big" websi
> I agree but not everyone think in the sameway. I have seen several big
> websites that got hit because they haven't used super globals in the code
> and their hosting provided would just change the PHP.ini setting and nothing
> would work.
Well if it's a "big" website then why use a hoster that
I agree but not everyone think in the sameway. I have seen several big
websites that got hit because they haven't used super globals in the code
and their hosting provided would just change the PHP.ini setting and nothing
would work.
GET, POST , SESSION, REQUEST everything was all dealt as just va
I started using superglobals since 4.x; not even thinking about it
from a security angle per se, but because it just makes sense to know
the source of where your input data is coming from. I guess
technically security is a byproduct of that thinking too.
On Jul 29, 2008, at 7:31 PM, VamVa
Its because PHP got really famous with version 4.0 and many people actually
converted their CGI or other websites in to PHP 4 websites because it was
easy and cheap. But 5.0 brought too many changes like serious OOPS and
register global concepts for security, which is useful but made transition
dif
> actually, a lot of stuff is finally saying "php5 only" now ...
Just in time for PHP6... :-)
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 7/28/08, n3or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compatibility to older Software of the hosters and sloth of the developers
i think this is a cop-out, any halfass open source package should be
compatible with php5 now.
i've been running php5 since it came out and everything i have tried
never has a
Richard Heyes wrote:
>> Finally - why migrate? What's the rush? Lots of people are still
>> running back-level software
>
> That I can understand. I'm still running Apache 1.3.33 (I think) along
> with PHP 5.0.4.
Right, you've answered your own question. You're still on Apache 1.3.33
because y
> Finally - why migrate? What's the rush? Lots of people are still
> running back-level software
That I can understand. I'm still running Apache 1.3.33 (I think) along
with PHP 5.0.4.
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, vis
n3or wrote:
Compatibility to older Software of the hosters and sloth of the
developers
Richard Heyes schrieb:
I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
I think because retro is hot these daysor wasor will b
> Why is COBOL still in use? :)
What is COBOL? :-)
--
Richard Heyes
http://www.phpguru.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 8:12 AM, Richard Heyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
> years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
>
> --
> Richard Heyes
> http://www.phpguru.org
Why is COBOL still in use? :)
--
PHP General Maili
Richard Heyes wrote:
> I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
> years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
Migration issues for instance - we have quite a bit of code that uses
sablotron - in PHP5 that's been changed to libxslt, which requires
extensive code-
Compatibility to older Software of the hosters and sloth of the developers
Richard Heyes schrieb:
I'm interested - why are people still using PHP4? It's been over 4
years (I think) - plenty of time to upgrade to five.
--
Viele Grüße
Dominik Strauß - www.n3or.de
Webentwicklung, PHP und Linux
M
Dietrich Bollmann wrote:
> As far as I remember, in all books I read about PHP and SQL, the
> password was stored in an encrypted form, even when all the data which
> should be protected by the password was stored in the same database.
>
> Can anybody tell me what is the motivation behind this ap
Hi Everyone,
I am taking another stab at this problem, complete with code and an
example...
Here is the issue:
I need to be able to display pounds and ounces of a given number of
pieces, the code I have does this just fine for a single route... But
what I can't seem to get through my hea
Jason Pruim wrote:
>> Why do you want tenth's of pounds? Just divide pounds by 16 and you'll
>> get ounces.
>
> It's actually for a weight calculator that we use for some of our
> mailings. when you take .226 and multiply that by 464 you get 104.864
> ounces.
>
> I need to be able to display that
On May 9, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Roberto Mansfield wrote:
Roberto Mansfield wrote:
(I'm assuming .226 is the cost per ounce and 464 is the total
number of
ounces)
It sure is Friday. This assumption doesn't make any sense!
Yeah... and my work day is almost done! SO Happy Friday to you all!
B
Roberto Mansfield wrote:
> (I'm assuming .226 is the cost per ounce and 464 is the total number of
> ounces)
It sure is Friday. This assumption doesn't make any sense!
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
At 1:29 PM -0400 5/9/08, Jason Pruim wrote:
Hey tedd
On May 9, 2008, at 1:21 PM, tedd wrote:
At 12:56 PM -0400 5/9/08, Jason Pruim wrote:
Hi Everyone,
SO it's friday, I'm tired, and I can't seem to think straight... I
am attempting to do some very basic math with some arrays...
Here's the
Hey tedd
On May 9, 2008, at 1:21 PM, tedd wrote:
At 12:56 PM -0400 5/9/08, Jason Pruim wrote:
Hi Everyone,
SO it's friday, I'm tired, and I can't seem to think straight... I
am attempting to do some very basic math with some arrays... Here's
the pseudo code that I'm working with:
Numbe
On May 9, 2008, at 1:05 PM, Dan Joseph wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi Everyone,
SO it's friday, I'm tired, and I can't seem to think straight... I am
attempting to do some very basic math with some arrays... Here's
the pseudo
code that
At 12:56 PM -0400 5/9/08, Jason Pruim wrote:
Hi Everyone,
SO it's friday, I'm tired, and I can't seem to think straight... I
am attempting to do some very basic math with some arrays... Here's
the pseudo code that I'm working with:
NumberOfPieces * PieceWeight = TotalWeight
explode total we
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> SO it's friday, I'm tired, and I can't seem to think straight... I am
> attempting to do some very basic math with some arrays... Here's the pseudo
> code that I'm working with:
>
> NumberOfPieces * PieceWei
thomas Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I created this script to send emails:
> ---
> $mailFromEmail = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> $mailFromName = "MYDOMAIN";
> $mailTo = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
>
> $mailHeaders =
> "From: $mailFromName <$mailFromEmail>\n"
> . "Content
thomas Armstrong wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I created this script to send emails:
> ---
> $mailFromEmail = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> $mailFromName = "MYDOMAIN";
> $mailTo = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
>
> $mailHeaders =
> "From: $mailFromName <$mailFromEmail>\n"
> . "Content-Type: text/plain; "
> . "ch
2008. 03. 28, péntek keltezéssel 12.28-kor Jason Pruim ezt írta:
> Hi everyone :) Happy friday to all of you!
>
> Here's my issues, I am attempting to echo the results of mysqli query
> out to my script just so I can make sure it's working right, what I'm
> hoping to do in the long run is comp
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip!]
>
> $oldpasswordquery = "SELECT loginPassword, Record FROM current WHERE
> loginPassword='{$oldPassHash}' AND Record='{$Record}'";
> $chpwold[] = mysqli_query($chpwpostlink, $oldpasswordquery) or
> die("Sorry read
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 28, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Eric Butera wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> $chpwold[] = mysqli_query($chpwpostlink, $oldpasswordquery) or
> >> die("Sorry r
On Mar 28, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Eric Butera wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
$chpwold[] = mysqli_query($chpwpostlink, $oldpasswordquery) or
die("Sorry read failed: ". mysqli_error($chpwpostlink));
$chpwresult = $chpwold[0];
Why would you pump that
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> $chpwold[] = mysqli_query($chpwpostlink, $oldpasswordquery) or
> die("Sorry read failed: ". mysqli_error($chpwpostlink));
> $chpwresult = $chpwold[0];
Why would you pump that into an array instead of just calling it
resu
2008. 03. 24, hétfő keltezéssel 14.40-kor Daniel Brown ezt írta:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > It's already been escaped, $business is pulled out of the database
> > after they log in. :)
>
> I don't care, Prune.
>
> (I still get a kic
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > It's already been escaped, $business is pulled out of the database
> > after they log in. :)
>
> I don't care, Prune.
>
> (I still
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's already been escaped, $business is pulled out of the database
> after they log in. :)
I don't care, Prune.
(I still get a kick out of knowing that. Who was it, Jochem or
Zoltan who said that? ;-P)
NE
On Mar 24, 2008, at 2:23 PM, Daniel Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Attempting to get this query:
"SELECT customerName, loginName, email, adminLevel FROM current WHERE
customerBusiness=$business ORDER BY adminLevel"
to work.
S
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Attempting to get this query:
> "SELECT customerName, loginName, email, adminLevel FROM current WHERE
> customerBusiness=$business ORDER BY adminLevel"
>
> to work.
> So far it doesn't like me... It pops
Okay... so as happens to me more times then I care to admit... as soon
as I sent it I simply added: .WHERE
customerBusiness='$business'. and it works just fine... Sorry for
the noise!
On Mar 24, 2008, at 1:47 PM, Jason Pruim wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Attempting to get this query:
"SELE
- Original Message
From: Nathan Nobbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Lamp Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: php-general@lists.php.net
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 11:35:42 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP] why use {} around vraiable?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Lamp Lists <[EMAIL PR
On Mar 20, 2008, at 922AM, Lamp Lists wrote:
$query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$session_id}'");
For a non-array value, the curly braces are unnecessary:
$query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='$session_id'")
WIth an array element, you have to either us
On 20/03/2008, Lamp Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi,
> I saw several times that some people use this
>
> $parameters = array(
> 'param1' => "{$_POST["param1"]}",
> 'param2' => "{$_POST["param2"]}"
> );
>
> or
>
> $query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$session_id}'")
Lamp Lists wrote:
hi,
I saw several times that some people use this
$parameters = array(
'param1' => "{$_POST["param1"]}",
'param2' => "{$_POST["param2"]}"
);
or
$query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$session_id}'");
I would use:
$parameters = array(
'param1' => $_P
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Lamp Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi,
> I saw several times that some people use this
>
> $parameters = array(
> 'param1' => "{$_POST["param1"]}",
> 'param2' => "{$_POST["param2"]}"
> );
>
> or
>
> $query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$s
On Mar 20, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Lamp Lists wrote:
hi,
I saw several times that some people use this
$parameters = array(
'param1' => "{$_POST["param1"]}",
'param2' => "{$_POST["param2"]}"
);
or
$query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$session_id}'");
I would use:
$parameters =
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 09:22 -0700, Lamp Lists wrote:
> hi,
> I saw several times that some people use this
>
> $parameters = array(
> 'param1' => "{$_POST["param1"]}",
> 'param2' => "{$_POST["param2"]}"
> );
Ignorance.
> or
>
> $query = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE id='{$sess
Rick Pasotto wrote:
I have a routine that uses the PEAR module CRYPT_BLOWFISH to encrypt a
value and then base64_encode() to create a printable string. If I
reverse the process on the same host I get the orginal value however if
I do the reverse processing on a different host the result is garbag
So you wouldn't need to use session_start() when dealing with
session_register()?
On 3/10/08, Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Lamonte H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Is i
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Lamonte H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is it necessary to use session_register()? What exactly was the point of
> > this function if you can set sessions using $_SESSION it self?
> >
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Lamonte H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it necessary to use session_register()? What exactly was the point of
> this function if you can set sessions using $_SESSION it self?
>
RTFM: http://php.net/session-register.php
It's the old way of doing it, an
On 3/10/08, Lamonte H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it necessary to use session_register()? What exactly was the point of
> this function if you can set sessions using $_SESSION it self?
session_register() accepts a variable parameter list and does not
require a call to session_start() prior t
On Thu, January 10, 2008 10:00 pm, Arlen Christian Mart Cuss wrote:
> Why is it that if I try to evaluate an index of an array returned by a
> function immediately, a syntax error is produced? (unexpected '[',
> expecting ',' or ';')
Because PHP is not C.
It's language-design was chosen to not le
On Friday 11 January 2008, Zoltán Németh wrote:
> > So, make all your functions return objects, and have the object have a
> > method called get or index or something like that that returns the index
> > requested. :)
> >
> > Better yet, make everything an object: String, Numeric, Array, etc
>
>
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 3:45 AM, Zoltán Németh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
and call it Java ;)
or perhaps javascript :)
function cool() {
return [1, 2, 3];
}
alert(cool()[0]);
-nathan
or Ruby
--
Jim Lucas
"Some men are born to greatness, some achieve greatness,
Arlen Christian Mart Cuss schreef:
Hi there,
Why is it that if I try to evaluate an index of an array returned by a
function immediately, a syntax error is produced? (unexpected '[',
expecting ',' or ';')
because it's not valid syntax. strangely enough php is neither ,
nor is it capable of det
On Jan 11, 2008 3:45 AM, Zoltán Németh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and call it Java ;)
>
or perhaps javascript :)
function cool() {
return [1, 2, 3];
}
alert(cool()[0]);
-nathan
2008. 01. 10, csütörtök keltezéssel 21.25-kor Jim Lucas ezt írta:
> Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> > On Jan 10, 2008 11:00 PM, Arlen Christian Mart Cuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> Why is it that if I try to evaluate an index of an array returned by a
> >> function immediate
101 - 200 of 890 matches
Mail list logo
