I don't even understand what the first two code blocks are saying. Looks
like html, but I have never seen it like that. I also don't see the two
fields you specifically mention to start in your first select statement -
some other garbled names are there instead. Are you sure you've copied thi
On Jun 25, 2011, at 3:57 PM, asp kiddy wrote:
SELECT td.id_resultat,td.fld_email_id,email.fld_name_email
FROM $table_db td
JOIN $table_db_email email ON td.fld_email_id = email.id_email
WHERE td.id_resultat = $id
I see two small problems right away:
> FROM $table_db td
should read:
FROM
On Jun 25, 2011, at 3:57 PM, asp kiddy wrote:
This code works also but I don't know how I can include this second
query in my menu...
I'm not exactly sure what you want it to do -- perhaps you could mock
up some sample output to show what you're expecting? If you are simply
planning on r
On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 10:29 -0500, Tamara Temple wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2011, at 3:57 PM, asp kiddy wrote:
>
> > SELECT td.id_resultat,td.fld_email_id,email.fld_name_email
> > FROM $table_db td
> > JOIN $table_db_email email ON td.fld_email_id = email.id_email
> > WHERE td.id_resultat = $id
>
> I
Hi,
I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions.
Is it possible that FILTER_VALIDATE_URL only checks if the string has
http:// and do not check for the format domain.something?
$url = 'http://wwwtestcom';
$url = filter_var($url,FILTER_VALIDATE_URL);
echo $url;
-
On 06/26/2011 12:31 PM, Adam Tong wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions.
> Is it possible that FILTER_VALIDATE_URL only checks if the string has
> http:// and do not check for the format domain.something?
>
> $url = 'http://wwwtestcom';
> $url
On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 18:31, Adam Tong wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions.
> Is it possible that FILTER_VALIDATE_URL only checks if the string has
> http:// and do not check for the format domain.something?
>
> $url = 'http://wwwtestco
On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 20:10 +0100, Stuart Dallas wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 18:31, Adam Tong wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions.
> > Is it possible that FILTER_VALIDATE_URL only checks if the string has
> > http:// and do not che
On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 21:59, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 20:10 +0100, Stuart Dallas wrote:
> > On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 18:31, Adam Tong wrote: > Hi, > > I wanted tu
> > use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions. > Is it
> > possible that FILTER_VALIDA
On 06/26/2011 12:31 PM, Adam Tong wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid regular expresions.
> Is it possible that FILTER_VALIDATE_URL only checks if the string has
> http:// and do not check for the format domain.something?
>
> $url = 'http://wwwtestcom';
> $url
Guys, when you reply a mail, You should write your reply on the top of it,
not at the bottom of it.
makes it easier to follow.
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> On 06/26/2011 12:31 PM, Adam Tong wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted tu use php filters for validation to avoid re
On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 22:50, Fatih P. wrote:
> Guys, when you reply a mail, You should write your reply on the top of it,
> not at the bottom of it.
> makes it easier to follow.
This is a holy war, and not worth getting into again. The bottom line is that
top posting breaks the rules, regard
well, anyway ignore it then
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 22:50, Fatih P. wrote:
> > Guys, when you reply a mail, You should write your reply on the top of
> it,
> > not at the bottom of it.
> > makes it easier to follow.
> This is a holy w
On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 00:00 +0200, Fatih P. wrote:
> well, anyway ignore it then
>
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sunday, 26 June 2011 at 22:50, Fatih P. wrote:
> > > Guys, when you reply a mail, You should write your reply on the top of
> > it,
> > > not
In mailing lists and usenet you should never top post. You integrate
your reply or "follow up". This is well documented and makes sense in
tech threads were context is everything.
In adidition your content type in your post is incorrect.
Your header contains
Content-Type: multipart/alternative
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Richard Riley wrote:
>
> In mailing lists and usenet you should never top post. You integrate
> your reply or "follow up". This is well documented and makes sense in
> tech threads were context is everything.
>
> In adidition your content type in your post is inco
On Jun 26, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
I don't think that MySQL requires the 'AS' in that context, I write
queries like that without the 'AS' all the time.
This is what i get for trying to be coherent on 2 hours sleep
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To un
On 06/26/2011 04:50 PM, Fatih P. wrote:
> Guys, when you reply a mail, You should write your reply on the top of it,
> not at the bottom of it.
> makes it easier to follow.
>
Ready flame-throwers!
--
Thanks!
-Shawn
http://www.spidean.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To un
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 12:13 AM, wrote:
> The message for Netscape was very clear, the development community refused to
> write for it they had started a precedence that could not be forgotten.
> I say communities will not forget this act and remove the browser from their
> systems rather than
How do I launch a php script from another running php script
asynchronously?
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
You mean - you want a second thread to run independently of your current
"running" script? A wonderful thing to do and helpful for long intenesive
processes but do you really want to go thru the hassles of managing two
processes? Won't you have to verify the results of your offshoot and react
On 6/26/2011 7:58 PM, Jim Giner wrote:
You mean - you want a second thread to run independently of your current
"running" script? A wonderful thing to do and helpful for long intenesive
processes but do you really want to go thru the hassles of managing two
processes? Won't you have to verify t
On Jun 26, 2011, at 11:52 PM, Jim Lucas wrote:
On 6/26/2011 7:58 PM, Jim Giner wrote:
You mean - you want a second thread to run independently of your
current
"running" script? A wonderful thing to do and helpful for long
intenesive
processes but do you really want to go thru the hassles o
23 matches
Mail list logo
