Is there a way to tunnel require/include through a userspace streams
filter?
What I want to do is write a userspace streams filter and register that
as some kind of default filter through which require/include read their
files.
Thanks,
Sebastian
--
Sebastian Bergmann
Christian Stocker schrieb:
> 1) 0
> 2) 0
> 3) 0
> 4) 0
>
> Sorry for the noise. I was told to vote.
>
> Meaning, I don't care, never had a use for GOTO, but if the caring
> majority thinks, it's needed, why not :)
Same here.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-berg
On 7.3.2006 15:44 Uhr, Steph Fox wrote:
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
4) nothing
In Sean's words:
1) 0
2) 0
3) 0
4) 0
Sorry for the noise. I was told to vote.
Meaning, I don't care, never had a use for GOTO, but if the caring
major
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 16:22:08 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pierre) wrote:
> On 3/7/06, Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/7/06, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The point is that breakage is aggregated, not binary. The more
> > > stuff we break, the more difficult it is to
2) +1
Since I can see it's use, and I've already seen 101 ways to write
spagetti code, so 102 ways isnt much different ;)
Regards
Alan
Steph Fox wrote:
I took that as (2) +1, (4) +1.
Current raw totals amongst those who contribute to the PHP core: (1)
+5.5, (2) +9.5, (3) +0, (4) 2
Still
Sean Coates wrote:
Gareth Ardron wrote:
Hi,
Sort of mailing this in as the result of the rantings of quite a few
mates of mine who look after shared hosting boxes.
Would it be acceptable to do up a patch for the mail() function which'll
listen to an ini entry[0] for a logfile to log all mail
Gareth Ardron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sort of mailing this in as the result of the rantings of quite a few
> mates of mine who look after shared hosting boxes.
>
> Would it be acceptable to do up a patch for the mail() function which'll
> listen to an ini entry[0] for a logfile to log all mail sent usin
Hi
Could someone with Zend karma commit this to trunk and 5.1 branch please
to fix things for compiling for RISC OS.
Thanks
Alex
Index: Zend/zend_ini.h
===
RCS file: /repository/ZendEngine2/zend_ini.h,v
retrieving revision 1.37
di
Hi,
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 19:18, Steph Fox wrote:
> Current raw totals amongst those who contribute to the PHP core: (1) +5.5,
> (2) +9.5, (3) +0, (4) 2
>
> Still to vote: Derick, Marcus, George, Sascha, Hartmut, Chregu, Johannes,
> Sebastian, Stefan, apologies if I missed any names here.
Alri
Steph Fox wrote:
Still to vote: Derick, Marcus, George, Sascha, Hartmut, Chregu,
Johannes, Sebastian, Stefan, apologies if I missed any names here.
1) -1
2) +1
3) +.5
4) -0
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer.
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Join me at MySQL's
Hi,
Sort of mailing this in as the result of the rantings of quite a few
mates of mine who look after shared hosting boxes.
Would it be acceptable to do up a patch for the mail() function which'll
listen to an ini entry[0] for a logfile to log all mail sent using this
function.
Basically, th
RL>>I still think this is a really fringe feature that isn't worth one of
RL>>the first forward compatibility breaks in the procedural language in
RL>>years.
For the record, I'm happy even without either feature :) but I remember
labeled break was quite useful for me in Perl - and it seems to m
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 13:52, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > I don't remember, but I think Sarah Golemon allowed for it in one of her
> > patches way back:
> >
> > goto $map[$choice];
> >
> Yes, and targeting dynamic labels was one of the first big sacrifices on the
> altar of compromise. Current impleme
Hello Dmitry,
Tuesday, March 7, 2006, 10:28:27 AM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
> Please reviw and vote.
> 1) goto and break label
-1e307
> 2) goto only (like C)
-1e307
>
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
Please reviw and vote.
1) goto and break label
+1
2) goto only (like C)
+1
3) break label only (like Java)
+1
4) nothing
-1
reg
Hello Mike,
that is a good idea imo. Putting all the stuff in an extension that is per
default enabled in 6.0 and then in 6.1 moved to pecl. If everything
generates E_STRICT/E_NOTICE then we should be fine.
best regards
marcus
Tuesday, March 7, 2006, 5:51:42 PM, you wrote:
> Just a silly litt
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Steph Fox wrote:
> I took that as (2) +1, (4) +1.
>
> Current raw totals amongst those who contribute to the PHP core: (1) +5.5, (2)
> +9.5, (3) +0, (4) 2
>
> Still to vote: Derick, Marcus, George, Sascha, Hartmut, Chregu, Johannes,
> Sebastian, Stefan, apologies if I missed
Steph Fox wrote:
> Still notably haven't heard from: Lukas, Nuno, Alan K, Sean...
1) 0
2) 0
3) 0
4) 0
Sorry for the noise. I was told to vote.
I don't personally have much use for goto, and I see both sides.
I also only run PHP on dedicated platforms, so if appropriate engine
mods were made (if
I don't remember, but I think Sarah Golemon allowed for it in one of her
patches way back:
goto $map[$choice];
Yes, and targeting dynamic labels was one of the first big sacrifices on the
altar of compromise. Current implementation options use static,
compile-time resolved labels only.
-Sar
Hi,
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 19:14, Robert Cummings wrote:
> I don't remember, but I think Sarah Golemon allowed for it in one of her
> patches way back:
>
>
> $map = array
> (
> 1 => 'bad',
> 2 => 'good',
> 3 => 'bad',
> 4 => 'acceptable',
> );
>
> goto $map[$choice];
NOOO - If
I took that as (2) +1, (4) +1.
Current raw totals amongst those who contribute to the PHP core: (1) +5.5,
(2) +9.5, (3) +0, (4) 2
Still to vote: Derick, Marcus, George, Sascha, Hartmut, Chregu, Johannes,
Sebastian, Stefan, apologies if I missed any names here.
Current raw totals amongst all
label_a:
$i=0;
label_b:
$i++;
while($i<10) {
if(foo()) continue label_b;
else {
if(bar($i++)) goto label_a;
}
}
And that would be a parse error.
break/continue label only works when the label IMMEDIATELY preceeds the loop
construct thus saying "I identify th
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 12:58, John Coggeshall wrote:
> if($choice == 1) {
> goto bad;
> } else if ($choice == 2) {
> goto good;
> } else if ($choice == 3) {
> goto bad;
> } else if ($choice == 4) {
> goto good;
> }
>
> good:
> $vote++;
> bad:
> return;
I don't r
if($choice == 1) {
goto bad;
} else if ($choice == 2) {
goto good;
} else if ($choice == 3) {
goto bad;
} else if ($choice == 4) {
goto good;
}
good:
$vote++;
bad:
return;
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 12:50 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-0
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Rasmus,
C hasn't "break label;", and I don't understand why Java way confising C
people.
It is clear and fit into structured programming.
But the thing doesn't say:
this-is-a-break-label label:
It just says:
label:
Which would lead me to write something like:
label
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 12:50, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 09:50 AM 3/7/2006, Robert Cummings wrote:
> >On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 04:28, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> > > for discussion once again together with GOTO pa
At 09:50 AM 3/7/2006, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 04:28, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) got
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 04:28, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only (like
Rasmus,
C hasn't "break label;", and I don't understand why Java way confising C
people.
It is clear and fit into structured programming.
Thanks. Dmitry.
> -Original Message-
> From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 7:09 PM
> To: Stanislav Malysh
(2) +1e10
On Mar 7, 2006, at 1:28 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and
post it
for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
Please reviw and vote.
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
Hi,
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 10:28, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> 1) goto and break label
+1
> 2) goto only (like C)
+1
> 3) break label only (like Java)
-1
> 4) nothing
-1
Regards,
Magnus "Currently 'a bit' inactive" Määttä
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visi
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 12:28 +0300, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only
Just a silly little brainstorm
What about moving those functions to a separate php extension where they
can eventually be phased out? At least at that point you can get it all
out of the core but still provide an easy way for people who need the BC
to have it. (is there already a deprec extens
1) goto and break label
+0
Making goto's labels work with break is cheap, but less vital than goto.
2) goto only (like C)
+1
Within scope and out of break context is a given. My preference is to not
limit jumping to forward only, though such a limit would still be a step in
the right directio
Mike Bretz wrote:
Note that this small application does not segfault, but when executing
some (a lot) just before and after that code sniplet it almost always
leads to a crash here.
Who is able to look at that and provide a patch?
Please file a proper bug report at bugs.php.net and make sure
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
RL>>As a C programmer this confuses me to no end. When I see "label:" I expect
The question is should all languages be like C? So, C has it that way, and
Java and Perl have it other way. We don't move to prefix notation because
Forth has it ;)
No, obviously all lan
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) goto and break label
+0.5
2) goto only (like C)
+1
3) break label only (like Java)
-1
Rob
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Yes 2. Sorrry
At 07:28 AM 3/7/2006, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'm with Rasmus on the break label stuff. Although it's not confusing to
> me, I got convinced quickly that it'll be confusing to the wider
> audience. So big -1 from me for (2) & (1).
>From your comment bellow I f
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'm with Rasmus on the break label stuff. Although it's not confusing to
> me, I got convinced quickly that it'll be confusing to the wider
> audience. So big -1 from me for (2) & (1).
>From your comment bellow I figure you're for option 2, right?
Edin
> I think we should
On 3/7/06, Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/06, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The point is that breakage is aggregated, not binary. The more stuff
> > we break, the more difficult it is to port, and frankly, it's quite
> > likely that a non OO app could migrate fairly c
Hello,
we currently monitor segmentation faults on all of our production and
development servers running php 5.0.5 and 5.1.2 which leads to a
complete application failure. We will need a quick solution the reason
why I write this to the list instead of to bugs.php.net.
We traced down the pro
I'm with Rasmus on the break label stuff. Although it's not confusing
to me, I got convinced quickly that it'll be confusing to the wider
audience. So big -1 from me for (2) & (1).
I think we should either stick with nothing or go to a full goto
(without jumping into scopes of course). Only fo
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only (like Java)
> 4) nothing
For what
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
4) nothing
Thanks for giving this a final chance, Dmitry.
1) +0.5
3) +1
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Pierre,
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 15:16, Pierre wrote:
> Fair enough, as I said in my last post in the magic_quotes thread, it
> is easy to keep this function. I will modify the patch to keep the
> related functions (returning always false). Is is ok?
I'd also mark them as deprecated using the
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) goto and break label
+1
2) goto only (like C)
+1
3) break label only (like Java)
-1
Ilia
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Sascha Schumann wrote:
5) goto, fowarding-jumping only.
which would more or less make it useless for state machine stuff, right?
--
Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer.
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com
Join me at MySQL's 2006 Users Conference, April 24-27!
http:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
The point is that breakage is aggregated, not binary. The more stuff we
break, the more difficult it is to port, and frankly, it's quite likely
that a non OO app could migrate fairly cleanly even to PHP 6 with
unicode disabled (perhaps with minor fixes). get_magic_quotes_
On 3/7/06, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The point is that breakage is aggregated, not binary. The more stuff
> we break, the more difficult it is to port, and frankly, it's quite
> likely that a non OO app could migrate fairly cleanly even to PHP 6
> with unicode disabled (perhaps w
At 12:27 07/03/2006, Pierre wrote:
On 3/7/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Stefan Esser wrote:
>
> >
> > > That was the plan. Checking for register_globals should return
> > > false.
> >
> > Pierre's list says it removes things like
> > get_magic_quotes_gpc() .
On 3/7/06, Dmitry Stogov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only (like J
At 11:28 07/03/2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
Please reviw and vote.
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
4) nothing
My vote:
On 3/7/06, Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/7/06, Dmitry Stogov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1) goto and break label
> +1
>
> I'm happy with goto, but don't mind getting labelled breaks "for
> free"; labels are better than numbers.
same here +1
> > 2) goto only (like C)
+1
> > 3)
On 3/7/06, Dmitry Stogov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) goto and break label
+1
I'm happy with goto, but don't mind getting labelled breaks "for
free"; labels are better than numbers.
> 2) goto only (like C)
+1
> 3) break label only (like Java)
+0.5, but only if we don't have goto
--Wez.
--
P
Hello,
Given the little objections in the other thread (about
register_globals), I like to commit this patch anyway.
If this discussion conclusion is to keep the faked functions and ini
entries, we can add them later.
My only problem is how to add E_CORE_ERROR in a nice way for the faked
ini ent
On 3/7/06, Stefan Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >What is the point of detecting something that does not exist anymore?
> >
> >It is not a problem to add these checks and errors, only senseless.
> >
> >What is the reason to do it? PHP6 will require most applications to be
> >ported, this prob
>What is the point of detecting something that does not exist anymore?
>
>It is not a problem to add these checks and errors, only senseless.
>
>What is the reason to do it? PHP6 will require most applications to be
>ported, this problem will be their smallest problem and can be easily
>emulated i
On 3/7/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Stefan Esser wrote:
>
> >
> > > That was the plan. Checking for register_globals should return
> > > false.
> >
> > Pierre's list says it removes things like
> > get_magic_quotes_gpc() ..., which is a NONO.
>
> yeah, agreed
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Michael Wallner wrote:
> > > 3) break label only (like Java)
> > +1
>
> You do realize that this is:
>
> label:
> while(condition) {
>break label;
> }
>
> As a C programmer this confuses me to no end. When I see "label:" I expect
> control
On 07.03.2006 11:28, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi,
Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
Please reviw and vote.
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
4) nothing
2) +0.5
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> > for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
> >
> > Please reviw and vote.
> >
> > 1) goto and break la
RL>>As a C programmer this confuses me to no end. When I see "label:" I expect
The question is should all languages be like C? So, C has it that way, and
Java and Perl have it other way. We don't move to prefix notation because
Forth has it ;)
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
[EM
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Michael Wallner wrote:
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) goto and break label
+0
3) break label only (like Java)
+1
You do realize that this is:
label:
while(condition) {
break label;
}
As a C programmer this confuses me to no end. When I see "label:" I
expe
Michael Wallner wrote:
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) goto and break label
+0
3) break label only (like Java)
+1
You do realize that this is:
label:
while(condition) {
break label;
}
As a C programmer this confuses me to no end. When I see "label:" I
expect control to end up there
DS>>1) goto and break label
DS>>2) goto only (like C)
DS>>3) break label only (like Java)
DS>>4) nothing
1) +0.5 2) -1 3) +1
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.115
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) goto and break label
+0
3) break label only (like Java)
+1
Regards,
--
Michael - http://dev.iworks.at/ext-http/http-functions.html.gz
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only (like Java)
> 4) nothing
1) +1
Edin
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
> for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
>
> Please reviw and vote.
>
> 1) goto and break label
> 2) goto only (like C)
> 3) break label only (like Java)
>
Hi,
Because of some confused people I reverted "break label" patch and post it
for discussion once again together with GOTO patch.
Please reviw and vote.
1) goto and break label
2) goto only (like C)
3) break label only (like Java)
4) nothing
My vote: (1) +0.5, (4) +0.5
Thanks. Dmitry.
test
> It *has* to be an E_STRICT because it's something related to language
> and possible semantic errors. E_NOTICE is not for that.
Isn't it the same as the following?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ php5 -d"error_reporting=2047" -r '$a=$b;'
Notice: Undefined variable: b in Command line code on line 1
Accor
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Stefan Esser wrote:
>
> > That was the plan. Checking for register_globals should return false.
>
> Pierre's list says it removes things like get_magic_quotes_gpc() ...,
> which is a NONO.
yeah, agreed. And we should also throw errors when people make the
setting, as per
> That was the plan. Checking for register_globals should return false.
Pierre's list says it removes things like get_magic_quotes_gpc() ...,
which is a NONO.
Stefan
--
--
Stefan Esser
Stefan Esser wrote:
Stop for a moment...
What you guys are doing at the moment will completely break tons of
applications.
The ini settings that previously allowed activating/deactivating
register_globals/magic_quotes MUST stay or atleast be emulated.
It must be possible for an application to de
73 matches
Mail list logo
