Are these functions in fact non-experimental? If so, I will remove the
warning from the mb_* functions in the manual.
S
Al Baker wrote:
Thanks for the confirmation. The experimental warning appears on any of
the individual help files for mbstring (e.g. mb_ereg).
Which manual says that mbstring
Thanks for the confirmation. The experimental warning appears on any of
the individual help files for mbstring (e.g. mb_ereg).
Do you know if the regular expression support lets you match alpha and
numeric content like you would normally?
Al
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 05:52 +0900, Moriyoshi Koizumi
On 27.8.2004 20:23 Uhr, Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:33 27/08/2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On August 27, 2004 11:31 am, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
> >>Aren't PECL package version numbers already providing this?
> >
> > But not everything is in PECL :)
>
> any bundled extension
Hi,
On 2004/08/28, at 5:15, Al Baker wrote:
I'm trying to find status on the multibyte support in PHP. The manual
shows the functions in mbstring to be experimental and it's hard to
find
evidence of how stable it really is.
Which manual says that mbstring is still experimental? :) it was marked
"
Hello Mathieu,
thanks for the fix.
Friday, August 27, 2004, 10:33:31 PM, you wrote:
> This patches fixes a simple error in the dbareader.inc files.
> Enjoy
> --
> Math
> aka ROunofF
[...]
-?>>
> \ No newline at end of file
+?>>
btw: The missing new line is intentional.
best regards
This patches fixes a simple error in the dbareader.inc files.
Enjoy
--
Math
aka ROunofF
==
argontechnologies.ca
Index: dbareader.inc
===
RCS file: /repository/php-src/ext/spl/examples/dbareader.inc,v
retrieving revision 1.3
dif
Hi,
I'm trying to find status on the multibyte support in PHP. The manual
shows the functions in mbstring to be experimental and it's hard to find
evidence of how stable it really is.
Is this natively supported in PHP after 4.3.x?
Thanks,
Al
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
Hi everyone,
While playing with Ldap, Squirrelmail and an Active Directory server I
ran into a limitation of the PHP ldap_modify function.
In general, an (non-PHP) ldap_modify will allow you to add, replace and
delete several attributes for a DN in one single transaction. The PHP
Ldap extension
At 18:33 27/08/2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
On August 27, 2004 11:31 am, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
> >>Aren't PECL package version numbers already providing this?
> >
> > But not everything is in PECL :)
>
> any bundled extensions that are still EXPERIMENTAL should
> move t
At 01:56 PM 8/27/2004 -0400, Rob Richards wrote:
I hadn't even thought about that but it should give the desired results.
Can the error message be modified slightly to indicate that it is running
under ze1 compat in zend_execute.c?
Right now it just says: "Trying to clone an uncloneable object of c
I hadn't even thought about that but it should give the desired results.
Can the error message be modified slightly to indicate that it is running
under ze1 compat in zend_execute.c?
Right now it just says: "Trying to clone an uncloneable object of class %s",
which is fine in most cases, but at lea
Hi Andi Gutmans, you wrote:
> You can just create a new zval by using
> MAKE_STD_ZVAL() and setting the relevant fields.
Fair enough; I was searching for kinda ZVAL_OBJ[ECT]()
macro at second, without success...
> If you get stuck let me know.
A tiny piece of code would help a lot :)
I can't
At 05:54 AM 8/27/2004 -0400, Rob Richards wrote:
That would be fine to not allow the problem extensions to run under ze1 and
end up issuing zend_error(E_ERROR, "Trying to clone an uncloneable object of
class %s", Z_OBJCE_P(value)->name) (which currently happens when no clone
handler is implimented
There doesn't exist such a thing as the object's zval. An object can have
many zval's. The zval includes the object's id and handlers that manage the
object's behavior. You can just create a new zval by using MAKE_STD_ZVAL()
and setting the relevant fields.
If you get stuck let me know.
Andi
At
Hi Andrei Zmievski, you wrote:
> The main question is: why do you need to do it?
Exercise ;)
I'll try to explain after having dinner...
Thanks,
--
Michael - < mike(@)php.net >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[Oops. Send this email directly to Rasmus rather than the list...]
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 12:58:21PM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> 2. web app sends it to internals@ or some other relevant list
> 3. Replies to that email automatically get picked up by the web app
> 4. Alternatively, you ca
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Michael Wallner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an hopefully simple question;
> imagine the following statement:
>
> obj = (struct obj_struct *) zend_object_store_get_object(zval TSRMLS_CC);
>
>
> Ok, now I'm in a situation where I'd need the other way
> round, i.e. a way to fetch
On August 27, 2004 11:31 am, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
> >>Aren't PECL package version numbers already providing this?
> >
> > But not everything is in PECL :)
>
> any bundled extensions that are still EXPERIMENTAL should
> move to PECL anyway IMHO
+1
Ilia
--
PHP Interna
Derick Rethans wrote:
Aren't PECL package version numbers already providing this?
But not everything is in PECL :)
any bundled extensions that are still EXPERIMENTAL should
move to PECL anyway IMHO
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> >>I would like to get some feedback about my suggestion to move away from the
> >>simple 'experimental' status and dividing it into two - quality rating, and
> >>'API subject to change' tagging. Does this make sense to any
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
I would like to get some feedback about my suggestion to move away from the
simple 'experimental' status and dividing it into two - quality rating, and
'API subject to change' tagging. Does this make sense to anybody else?
As long as an extension can be marked as both, then
Hello Zeev,
Makes sense to me.
--
Best regards,
Jasonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Friday, August 27, 2004, 3:26:25 AM, you wrote:
ZS> I would like to get some feedback about my suggestion to move away from the
ZS> simple 'experimental' status and dividing it into tw
On August 27, 2004 03:26 am, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Me too.
> I would like to get some feedback about my suggestion to move away from the
> simple 'experimental' status and dividing it into two - quality rating, and
> 'API subject to change' tagging. Does this make sense to anybody else?
As long a
The DVAL_TO_LVAL macro is quite weird, I'm not sure exactly what it's
supposed to be doing but it probably isn't doing it. If the integral
part of d is outside the range of a long, the conversion has undefined
behaviour by the C99 standard; an explicit cast makes no difference
AFAICT.
GCC on IA64
The engine gurus have the final word :)
Andrey
Michael Wallner wrote:
Hi Andrey Hristov, you wrote:
isn't the situation that several zvals can reference one object?
Should this be read as "No way, sorry"? :)
Regards,
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: ht
Hi Andrey Hristov, you wrote:
> isn't the situation that several zvals can reference one object?
Should this be read as "No way, sorry"? :)
Regards,
--
Michael - < mike(@)php.net >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hey,
I was messing around with array_walk[_recursive] and found the behaviour it
uses to validate callback functions completely different to other standard
functions.
array_walk_recursive
http://lxr.php.net/source/php-src/ext/standard/array.c#
array_filter
http://lxr.php.net/source/php-src/e
That would be fine to not allow the problem extensions to run under ze1 and
end up issuing zend_error(E_ERROR, "Trying to clone an uncloneable object of
class %s", Z_OBJCE_P(value)->name) (which currently happens when no clone
handler is implimented).
In order for that to happen though the extens
isn't the situation that several zvals can reference one object?
Andrey
Michael Wallner wrote:
Hi,
I have an hopefully simple question;
imagine the following statement:
obj = (struct obj_struct *) zend_object_store_get_object(zval TSRMLS_CC);
Ok, now I'm in a situation where I'd need the other way
Hi,
I have an hopefully simple question;
imagine the following statement:
obj = (struct obj_struct *) zend_object_store_get_object(zval TSRMLS_CC);
Ok, now I'm in a situation where I'd need the other way
round, i.e. a way to fetch the zval of the obj I've got
(i.e. I have "obj" and need "zval"
ok, needs clearance. 2.5.10 didn't work for me when SOAP support
was enabled. I didn't try compiling without it since I just needed this
extension compiled (usually I leave it out as well as the XML stuff).
Andrey
Christian Stocker wrote:
On 27.8.2004 9:31 Uhr, Andrey Hristov wrote:
ext/soap pump
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:11:58 +0200, Sebastian Bergmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
> > What is wrong with how we currently do it?
>
> We have currently nothing like it. Or if we do, I haven't notices it in
> the last couple of years. And if I haven't, chances are that ou
On 27.8.2004 9:58 Uhr, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Christian Stocker wrote:
Actually, other people i talk to are always impressed, how this
"chaotic", based-on-common-agreement developement process actually
works at all ;)
Well, one reason might be no matter how fuzzy the process
there are some v
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> Christian Stocker wrote:
> > Actually, other people i talk to are always impressed, how this
> > "chaotic", based-on-common-agreement developement process actually works
> > at all ;)
>
> Well, one reason might be no matter how fuzzy the process
> t
On 27.8.2004 9:31 Uhr, Andrey Hristov wrote:
ext/soap pumped up the minimal requirement. It uses
xmlBufferCreateStatic which
is not found in the 2.5.x libxml2 . I upgraded to 2.6.7 and this helped.
Probably
when --disable-soap is used one can use 2.5.10+ . For me
libxml2-2.5.10-29.i586.rpm (sus
Christian Stocker wrote:
Actually, other people i talk to are always impressed, how this
"chaotic", based-on-common-agreement developement process actually works
at all ;)
Well, one reason might be no matter how fuzzy the process
there are some very clear metrics for the result, like
e.g. "compil
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I would like to get some feedback about my suggestion to move away from the
> simple 'experimental' status and dividing it into two - quality rating, and
> 'API subject to change' tagging. Does this make sense to anybody else?
yes, sounds much better th
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
No, as your vote doesn't get more important in general as you
contribute. Instead you vote for a certain way of doing something
and the most effective way of voting against this is to implement
a different approach. (as far as i understood)
Hm, I always thought that the c
ext/soap pumped up the minimal requirement. It uses xmlBufferCreateStatic which
is not found in the 2.5.x libxml2 . I upgraded to 2.6.7 and this helped. Probably
when --disable-soap is used one can use 2.5.10+ . For me
libxml2-2.5.10-29.i586.rpm (suse 9.0) didn't work.
andrey
George Schlossnagle w
At 10:10 27/08/2004, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 27.8.2004 8:59 Uhr, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
At last weekend's EuroFoo [1] I attended Marc-Andre Lemburg's talk [2]
on the Python development process.
I really wish we had a process similar to Python's PEP
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > 1. Submit proposal to web app
> > 2. web app sends it to internals@ or some other relevant list
> > 3. Replies to that email automatically get picked up by the web app
> > 4. Alternatively, you can add comments via the web
Naik, Roshan wrote:
Andi wrote:
Oh boy, if you don't see the difference between "concrete
Once again I am *not* asking to hold a whip to the
developers who are working for free here. Just
dont include code until its ready. Let them mature
elsewhere and carefully pick the best of the lot.
Invite
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
whereas we now are mostly do-o-cratic (a nice term that came up
at EuroFoo although i don't remember where i picked it up ...)
Which is just colloquial for meritocratic, AFAICS :-)
No, as your vote doesn't get more important in general as you
co
Derick Rethans wrote:
What is wrong with how we currently do it?
We have currently nothing like it. Or if we do, I haven't notices it in
the last couple of years. And if I haven't, chances are that our users
haven't either :-)
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
whereas we now are mostly do-o-cratic (a nice term that came up
at EuroFoo although i don't remember where i picked it up ...)
Which is just colloquial for meritocratic, AFAICS :-)
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://phpOpenTracker
On 27.8.2004 8:59 Uhr, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
At last weekend's EuroFoo [1] I attended Marc-Andre Lemburg's talk [2]
on the Python development process.
I really wish we had a process similar to Python's PEPs [3] [4] for
PHP.
Having guidelines for issu
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> At last weekend's EuroFoo [1] I attended Marc-Andre Lemburg's talk [2]
> on the Python development process.
>
> I really wish we had a process similar to Python's PEPs [3] [4] for
> PHP.
>
> Having guidelines for issues like adding a new module [5]
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> >
> >>That's wrong. You should *never* require an E_WARNING to be sent
> >>without being able to silence it, especially not on something so
> >>unimportant.
> >
> >It's just as w
48 matches
Mail list logo
