Hi Andi:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:24:45PM +0200, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'll try and take a look at it next week (I had no time this week).
Understandable. Thanks for the update.
> The problem is that there where bugs in the past when returning by
> reference not variables, which could cause memory corruptions.
Yes, yes.
> In order not to completely break every script in some
> cases we can turn a blind eye and allow it (such as return 4;) because it
> can be dealt with.
I assume by something along the lines of internally assigning it to a
variable with a pointer to it (pardon the potential lack of computer
science / C programming terminology). I guess, then this begs the already
answered question -- why not do the same with methods, etc? The answer
thus far has been that it's too hard to do, which is okay by me.
> Anyway, as I said it's something I need to look into more detail again
> which I'll do soon.
Just to clarify, my main concern is that everyone know what the behavior
is going to be and that it's not going to change again, then document the
precise rules. I'll be glad to help with documentation, when it comes to
that point.
Though, it seems the behavior should be consistent -- sometimes I'm too
logical :) -- so returning a variable is okay and the rest of it should be
blocked, OR rework the system so anything can be returend.
Thanks again,
--Dan
--
FREE scripts that make web and database programming easier
http://www.analysisandsolutions.com/software/
T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y
4015 7th Ave #4AJ, Brooklyn NY v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
