$B(.(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(B
$B4|4V8BDj(BPC$B%=%U%HHNGd(B
$B(1(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(,(B
$B!!M_$7$+$C$?$"$N%=%U%H$,$3$N2A3J!*(B
$B!!Cf$K$O(B100$BK|1_0J>e$b$9$k%=%U%H$,!D6C$-$N$3$N2A3J!*(B
$B!!!
On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:27:31 -0500, Greg Beaver wrote:
> Curt Zirzow wrote:
>> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:21:57 -0700, Greg Beaver wrote:
>>
>>>I've been running the pear command using PHP 5.1rc1 ever since it came
>>>out, and it works just fine. This is a problem specific to the
>>>install-pear.pha
Curt Zirzow wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:21:57 -0700, Greg Beaver wrote:
>
>>I've been running the pear command using PHP 5.1rc1 ever since it came
>>out, and it works just fine. This is a problem specific to the
>>install-pear.phar that in fact did not happen just 2 weeks ago - perhaps
>>some
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:21:57 -0700, Greg Beaver wrote:
>
> I've been running the pear command using PHP 5.1rc1 ever since it came
> out, and it works just fine. This is a problem specific to the
> install-pear.phar that in fact did not happen just 2 weeks ago - perhaps
> something has changed in
Helgi Þormar wrote:
On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:21:57 -0700, Greg Beaver wrote:
Until all the standard unix
distros (gentoo/redhat/debian/etc.) start distributing PHP 5.x as the
standard PHP version, this isn't an option.
Just so you know, Fedora and FreeBSD have had 5.x as standard for some
time
Yep, I agree with this. We'll check but I'm pretty sure we're not
corrupting EG(This) (which in any case is an implementation detail
and too relevant to this discussion).
As in PHP, you can't change the $this pointer, I do think we should
have a message about this. I'd suggest an E_WARNING becau
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Assigning to it will break "this" in the symbol table, or EG(This)? If
> it's the latter then it is a problem (and it's the reason I didn't
> support it to begin with).
Given that:
class foo {
function bar() {
$this->a = 1;
$ref = &$this;
$ref->b = 2;
Hello Pierre,
if this had fixed the error i'd agree.
Sunday, October 2, 2005, 4:47:10 AM, you wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 20:08:51 +0200
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Boerger) wrote:
>> Hello Greg,
>>
>> this only hides the syntoms but doesn't fix anything
> Hi Marcus,
> I think it's enoug
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 10:40, Robert Cummings wrote:
> Either way I'm not weighing in on the $ref = &$this issue
Actually, I think I will.
I think $ref = &$this is perfectly legal and
I think $this = &$ref or $this = $anything is perfectly illegal.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
.--
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 09:49, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Richard Mann wrote:
>
> > Hmmm I agree about the reassigning of $this, but not the passing of
> > $this by ref.
>
> Why are you passing an object be reference? Never heard that in PHP 5
> objects are always references?
Hello Christian,
Monday, October 3, 2005, 4:29:19 PM, you wrote:
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> php 4 code is wrong in this and we don't want to support the errors
>> forever.
> Programming is like sex: One mistake and you have to maintain it for the
> rest of your life (-:C
> Sometimes I wish I
Assigning to it will break "this" in the symbol table, or EG(This)?
If it's the latter then it is a problem (and it's the reason I didn't
support it to begin with).
Andi
At 07:05 AM 10/3/2005, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
At first $ref =& $this; produced fatal error because of the bug (not by
de
See my note regarding the fixes we did in the past 1-2 weeks
regarding references. It's a huge BC break, and quite frankly, it's
not the kind of thing that forces you not to write good code because
it's supported.
Andi
At 07:13 AM 10/3/2005, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Dmitry,
that IS NOT
Hey,
I was the original person that started disallowing assigning $this by
reference.
Question really boils down to, how is this different from the
reference fixes we did a couple of weeks ago, where due to too many
apps breaking (and a lot broke) we created a work-around for this
behavior wi
Marcus Boerger wrote:
php 4 code is wrong in this and we don't want to support the errors
forever.
Programming is like sex: One mistake and you have to maintain it for the
rest of your life (-:C
Sometimes I wish I would have insisted more in Nov. 1999 when I brought
up the reference vs. c
Marcus,
BC is working. PHP5 has zend.ze1_compatibility_mode and some PHP
applications use it.
BTW to disallow =& $this and passing $this by reference we should change not
only compiler but also executor.
On each parameter passing we should check if we do passing $this by
reference (it is not poss
On 10/3/05, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Dmitry,
>
> that IS NOT proper code and it wasn't in php 4 either, it was only a
> workaround that is no longer needed. Had the php 4 design been correct in
> the first place that wouldn't have been allowed in 4 either. Since BC is not
Hello Dmitry,
that IS NOT proper code and it wasn't in php 4 either, it was only a
workaround that is no longer needed. Had the php 4 design been correct in
the first place that wouldn't have been allowed in 4 either. Since BC is not
working out anyway i see absolutley no reason to encourage peo
Hi,
At first $ref =& $this; produced fatal error because of the bug (not by
design).
For example $ref->prop =& $this; worked and works without errors.
So my patch shouldn't be reverted in any case.
At second disallowing such assignments and passign $this by reference will
breake a lot of PHP4 co
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Richard Mann wrote:
> Hmmm I agree about the reassigning of $this, but not the passing of
> $this by ref.
Why are you passing an object be reference? Never heard that in PHP 5
objects are always references?
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.n
Hmmm I agree about the reassigning of $this, but not the passing of
$this by ref.
Example:
Class A {
public $tableName = 'Forum';
public $childObject;
public function __construct() {
$this->childObject = new B($this);
}
}
Class B {
private $parent;
publ
Hello Christian,
php 4 code is wrong in this and we don't want to support the errors
forever.
marcus
Monday, October 3, 2005, 3:39:00 PM, you wrote:
> Derick Rethans wrote:
>> pointless - I would even go as far as disallowing passing $this by
>> references to a function - where the reference
Derick Rethans wrote:
pointless - I would even go as far as disallowing passing $this by
references to a function - where the reference has to be ignored again,
This would be needed to have something like
function setfoo(&$obj)
{
$obj->foo = 42;
}
[...]
$other->setfoo($this);
in a w
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:09:22 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derick Rethans) wrote:
> I think we should prevent people from writing syntax like this, as it
> is not obvious what is going to happen.
I agree too.
The question is only about how to prevent users to do that without
breaking "everythi
Hello Derick,
Monday, October 3, 2005, 3:09:22 PM, you wrote:
> Hello,
> Dmitry committed a fix earlier to ignore the & in the statement above. I
> think this is not a good thing to do as it's simply conceptually wrong.
> The first thing is that ignoring syntax without issuing a warning is
>
Hello,
Dmitry committed a fix earlier to ignore the & in the statement above. I
think this is not a good thing to do as it's simply conceptually wrong.
The first thing is that ignoring syntax without issuing a warning is
dubious because people might think it does actually work, and secondly
be
Working on PEAR package Image3D
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
PHP 5 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (366 total including feature requests)
===[*General Issues]==
26771 Suspended register_tick_funtions crash under threaded webservers
==
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (632 total including feature requests)
===[Arrays related]===
31114 Assigned foreach modify array
===[CGI related]
29 matches
Mail list logo
