Addressing a bunch of comments at once: 1) I've removed is_available and renamed the set/get methods to: cli_process_title_set/get. I've also removed the test dependencies on pcntl and posix. The patch is updated: https://gist.github.com/keyurdg/4728770 2) Updated the RFC's introduction section with more concrete details about why this is necessary
In terms of doing this as an extension: the RFC addresses why this isn't possible. For folks who will not be using this feature, at worst they'll loose a few KB of memory: the amount needed to store the original argv and the original environ. On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Christoph Rosse <cro...@2bepublished.at > >wrote: > > > why wouldn't this go into core? setting the name of the current > > php-process is definitely something everyone that develops php-cli > scripts > > could use. > > > I use a lot of php-cli scripts and I've never seen the need. Without having > hard data to back this up, I am pretty sure that this applies to nearly all > php-cli scripts. > > > > We should not base the decision of putting something into the core on > > assumptions on how many people are going to use the feature. > > > Obviously we should. Whether people will use it is pretty much the most > important aspect for deciding whether or not something should be added. > Even a trivial addition is a loose for the project if nobody is going to > use it. And this is no trivial addition. This seems to be quite a bit > system dependent and uses some odd methods like overwriting argv memory. > And on that note, it also has to copy the argv data if I got that right, > which is something it has to do always and not just when people are > actually using the feature ;) > > I'm not saying I'm against this feature. I'd just really appreciate it if > we could drop the good old "it doesn't matter if people are going to use > it" non-arguments and instead provide a bit more info for people like me, > who are not in the process-title-hacking business. I.e. what this is needed > for an why this is needed in core. E.g. what Arvid mentioned, that this is > useful when you are running many PHP-based daemons and want to distinguish > them. That's the kind of stuff I'd like to see in the RFC. > > Regarding core/non-core. People mentioned that this is not implementable as > an extension. That can be either solved by putting it into core or by > adding the necessary API hook ;) [I'm not arguing which variant is better, > just saying that not being implementable with current core does not mean > that we can't make it implementable :)] > > Thanks, > Nikita >
