Antony Dovgal wrote: > On 07.03.2008 05:43, Gregory Beaver wrote: >> Just a quick note: I'd like to consider another possible approach, >> having pecl/phar synced from stable pecl release. > > I'm not sure it's good idea. > IMO it should go trough much more thorough testing to be included into the > core.
Hi, I wholeheartedly agree that phar needs more testing. I also think some other areas of php could have used more testing, such as the serious issues I found in zlib stream filters, but they were useful for years even with edge case flaws. Areas that I know phar needs work: * big-endian like PPC tar/zip support is incomplete, I need to write the simple byte order reversal that will complete this, and add the same compiler flags to the tar struct that we use on zip structs. This is an easy fix. * finishing up include_path support for streams. Other threads address this issue. This will remove the need for most of the proposed magic in pecl/phar/TODO. * ensuring full code coverage of tests, we're currently at about 68-70% * finishing up Steph's work on data-only tar/zip support (non-executable tar/zip read/write) * 2 open bugs at pecl.php.net * more hammering should be done on the web front controller to ensure edge cases have been considered Areas of phar that are rock-solid: * phar stream read/write * file format support for the 3 file formats read/write * anything else not yet mentioned. I expect to be able to wrap up the issues listed very quickly. Tony has been fantastic at finding memleaks/segfaults as new features are added, and we welcome the minutest scrutiny. > And I'm still not convinced we should include any PECL extensions in the core, > I believe it should go the other way round. This is secondary, but I'm proposing using phar to test the mechanism that will allow ext/ to migrate to pecl/ and still work as it did in ext/ Greg -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
