Ford, Mike wrote:
> There's a couple of grammatical errors in there, and the style could be
> improved some;
Thanks for spotting, feel free to fix my Engrish :-).
Jakub Vrana
On 16 August 2007 14:10, Jakub Vrana wrote:
> vrana Thu Aug 16 13:10:28 2007 UTC
>
> Modified files:
> /phpdoc/en/reference/misc/functions eval.xml
> Log:
> Parse error (bug #41890)
> In case of a
> parse error in the evaluated code,
> eval returns
> - &false;
On Jul 21, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
On 7/21/07, Nicolas Bérard-Nault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
nicobn Sat Jul 21 05:36:52 2007 UTC
Modified files:
/phpdoc/en/reference/misc/functions eval.xml
Log:
Removed reference to PHP3.
Out of curiosity, why?
There
On 7/21/07, Nicolas Bérard-Nault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
nicobn Sat Jul 21 05:36:52 2007 UTC
Modified files:
/phpdoc/en/reference/misc/functions eval.xml
Log:
Removed reference to PHP3.
Out of curiosity, why?
There is at least 160 other notes about PHP3 in the docs, shoul
> > Seriously ? I translate that and I'm really wondering the truth about
> > that... Is it like
> >
> > $code_str = '?>';
> >
That's what I was writing about.
> > Or I'm just wrong and don't understand what you said ? It
> > makes no sense
> > for me to do that...
The sense is you can do s
On 5/24/06, Ford, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
I agree, I think that addition is particularly impenetrable. However, what I
*think* he's getting at is that it's possible to do things like:
eval("?>Hello !");
This will definitely not work as you intended, you probably want
si
> -Original Message-
> From: Jean-Sébastien Goupil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 24 May 2006 13:52
>
> Hi,
>
> Seriously ? I translate that and I'm really wondering the truth about
> that... Is it like
>
> $code_str = '?>';
>
> Or I'm just wrong and don't understand what you said
Hi,
Seriously ? I translate that and I'm really wondering the truth about
that... Is it like
$code_str = '?>';
Or I'm just wrong and don't understand what you said ? It makes no sense
for me to do that...
Maybe it's good or just need a little rewording.
"you can prepend code_str *to* a clo
On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 03:54, Damien Seguy wrote:
> Le lundi, 9 jun 2003, à 15:31 America/Montreal, Philip Olson a écrit :
>
> >
> > return is how it's done, just like
> > include, print, etc.
> Yet, return is not a function, unlike include or print.
>
> could get a link to the anchor in the doc
Le lundi, 9 jun 2003, à 15:31 America/Montreal, Philip Olson a écrit :
return is how it's done, just like
include, print, etc.
Yet, return is not a function, unlike include or print.
could get a link to the anchor in the doc to return.
same would apply to continue and break, while, for.
That
return is how it's done, just like
include, print, etc.
Have a look at php.net/eval and notice it links to the return
docs. In conclusion: this should be reverted ;)
Ths simple proof is that /manual/en/function.return.php is the doc page
for return. return links to that.
Goba
--
PHP Documentati
return is how it's done, just like
include, print, etc.
Have a look at php.net/eval and notice it links to the return
docs. In conclusion: this should be reverted ;)
Regards,
Philip
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Damien Seguy wrote:
> dams Mon Jun 9 15:18:08 2003 EDT
>
> Modified files:
12 matches
Mail list logo
