On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:06 AM Scott Dutton <sc...@exussum.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Joe, > > I will have a look at splitting the PR, I am not at a computer where i > can code today though so will be tomorrow at the earliest. > > The Negative numbers will be a fair amount of work to make the tests > pass, would this still need to be done if the RFC doesnt pass ? I am > happy to do this work if it looks like it will pass, the reasons it > fails are outlined in the RFC as BC breaks. The tests seem to test the > values which make it fail more than I have seen other code use these > values. > > 887-939 are ignoring invalid input changes, everything else is negative > numbers > scripts/dev/bless_tests.php can be used to automatically update expected test output. Doesn't work for all tests (those with many manual wildcards for example), but may save you some work. Nikita > Hope that helps > > Scott > > On 19.06.2019 08:56, Joe Watkins wrote: > > There should probably be a PR targeting 7.4 with the implementation > > of "Error on ignored characters" as proposed for 7.4, and a PR > > targeting master implementing "Error on ignored characters" with > > exception change and implementing "Allow negative arguments". > > > > None of these PR's should cause tests to fail, and where new untested > > behaviour is introduced the PR should include tests for that. > > > > Cheers > > Joe > > > > On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 09:43, Scott Dutton <sc...@exussum.co.uk> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Joe, > >> > >> I will take a look at conflicts. The failures are extreme value > >> checks > >> which are a result of allowing the negative numbers. If the negative > >> numbers one passes I will fix all tests and add some more for the > >> negative values. The tests fail because of the unsigned -> signed > >> change > >> (but as you say there were quite a lot of tests). > >> > >> Would it be easier for 2 prs ? one for each vote ? > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Scott > >> > >> On 19.06.2019 08:31, Joe Watkins wrote: > >> > The implementation of this does not look ready, there are > >> conflicts > >> > so I can't test it locally, but last time CI ran there were many > >> > failures. > >> > > >> > Cheers > >> > Joe > >> > > >> > On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 09:24, Scott Dutton <sc...@exussum.co.uk> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi all > >> >> > >> >> I have put my RFC base convert changes to vote this morning > >> >> > >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/base_convert_improvements [1] [1] > >> >> > >> >> Two votes, one to raise a deprecated error in PHP7.4 (raised to > >> >> exception in PHP 8) when base_convert encounters something it > >> doesnt > >> >> know how to convert. > >> >> > >> >> Second vote is to allow negative numbers, eg base_convert('-FF', > >> 16, > >> >> 10) would return -255 (this returns 255 currently) > >> >> > >> >> Voting ends 3rd July > >> >> > >> >> Thanks > >> >> > >> >> Scott > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > >> >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php [2] [2] > >> > > >> > > >> > Links: > >> > ------ > >> > [1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/base_convert_improvements [1] > >> > [2] http://www.php.net/unsub.php [2] > > > > > > Links: > > ------ > > [1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/base_convert_improvements > > [2] http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
