On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Nicolas Bérard-Nault wrote:
> Permit me to give my 2 cents on that and share my small bit of experience
> with PHP 6.
>
> First of all, I totally agree with you Antony. I'm currently working on
> deploying a big codebase in PHP 6 (for those of you who didn't know, I'm the
> GS
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, chris# wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:38:03 -0700, Andrei Zmievski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yes, backporting major features from PHP 6 to 5 will slow down PHP 6
> > adoption, and I'd like to avoid it if possible.
> >
> > There is a way to run two engines side by side, b
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> On 10.07.2007, at 00:06, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
> > > I know, and I use spl_autoload_register. But then I would
> > > blatantly suggest to remove __autoload() in PHP6 and force SPL to
> > > be compiled into PHP.
> >
> > I wouldn't go as far
Hi Derick,
Your example will work fine.
I made a mistake in my sentence. I meant not "multiple files in namespace"
but "multiple namespaces in file".
Proposed concept allows multiple files in namespace but not multiple
namespaces in file.
Thanks. Dmitry.
> -Original Message-
> From: De
On Monday 09 July 2007, chris# wrote:
> I will venture to say that the biggest issue was; no transition period.
> That is to say that PHP4 and PHP5 are two completely different creatures.
> There was no "morphing" period. After several years of working with PHP3/4
> in this fashion, /suddenly/ mos
On Monday 09 July 2007, chris# wrote:
> OK. I can't help but notice the overall underwhelming reception to PHP5
> (mostly by ISP's). Which begs the question /why/? Shouldn't /that/ be the
> question? Or maybe I should ask: Has anybody bothered to find out why the
> majority of PHP installers /pref
On Monday 09 July 2007, Peter Brodersen wrote:
> Usually the PHP development does not bother with specific vendors,
> products, hosting companies or recommendations in general and so on.
> But if we really are up for it, it might have a pacific effect to put
> up some "known-good" lists; stuff lik
On 10.07.2007, at 01:19, chris# wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:38:03 -0700, Andrei Zmievski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, backporting major features from PHP 6 to 5 will slow down PHP 6
adoption, and I'd like to avoid it if possible.
There is a way to run two engines side by side, by the
On 10.07.2007, at 00:06, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
I know, and I use spl_autoload_register. But then I would blatantly
suggest to remove __autoload() in PHP6 and force SPL to be
compiled into
PHP.
I wouldn't go as far as removing it, but definitely would go as far
as not recommending to
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:25:32 -0700, in php.internals
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rasmus Lerdorf) wrote:
>> b) We will discontinue supporting PHP 4 on 8/8/8 (because it sounds good
>> and gives people about a year).
>
>The number 8 also has lots of meaning in Chinese culture. For example
>the Beijing Olymp
The large amount of the dual IS_UNICODE/IS_STRING will need to stay in
the code base anyway as we will be supporting binary strings in PHP 6.
So it's not accurate that all these maintance issues will be resolved by
not supporting unicode_semantics=off.
I believe unlike what Andrei said, for a larg
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 15:33 -0700, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Fixing unicode=on does not remove the IS_STRING/IS_UNICODE duality. We
> still have two kinds of data - unstructured bit stream and structured
> text.
But we still have the mess that most internal structures (function
tables, cl
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:38:03 -0700, Andrei Zmievski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, backporting major features from PHP 6 to 5 will slow down PHP 6
> adoption, and I'd like to avoid it if possible.
>
> There is a way to run two engines side by side, by the way: in
> separate instances of Apach
I also think we shouldn't backport features to PHP5. We should
(i) keep PHP5 a stable release with a known feature set for developers
to use.
(ii) have a smaller code base to maintain in PHP5, reducing the
overhead of merging.
(iii) avoid exacerbating the future situation with uptake of PHP6
Antony Dovgal kirjoitti:
On 10.07.2007 01:48, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
And I think that we shouldn't, since it removes a big incentive for
people to move to PHP 6.
I don't really see much sense in forcing people to use PHP6 if we accept
the "PHP5 = PHP6 - Unicode" formula.
They are just diffe
Do _I_ like that horrible IS_STRING/IS_UNICODE mess we have atm? No.
I don't think there's any way of having both unstructured character data
and Unicode text represented without having two distinct types. Either
that or you'd have to tell on each step which one it is, and that would
suck muc
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:48:28 -0700, Andrei Zmievski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I think that we shouldn't, since it removes a big incentive for
> people to move to PHP 6.
I would be inclined to agree as well.
>
> Really, we need to get folks to use Unicode natively as much as
> possible. It
Permit me to give my 2 cents on that and share my small bit of experience
with PHP 6.
First of all, I totally agree with you Antony. I'm currently working on
deploying a big codebase in PHP 6 (for those of you who didn't know, I'm the
GSoC student working on refactoring Jaws for PHP 6) and my hea
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 16:40:09 -0400, "Nicolas Bérard-Nault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> header() doesn't have to be the first statement in a file at all. It has to
> be called before any data is sent.
Thanks for the response.
Just wanted to see if there were any potential collisions here.
Thank
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 16:40:09 -0400, "Nicolas Bérard-Nault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> header() doesn't have to be the first statement in a file at all. It has to
> be called before any data is sent.
Thanks for the response.
Just wanted to see if there were any potential collisions here.
Thank
Andrei Zmievski schrieb:
> As we see now, yes they will be in PHP 6.
:-))
--
>e-novative> - We make IT work for you.
e-novative GmbH - HR: Amtsgericht München HRB 139407
Sitz: Wolfratshausen - GF: Dipl. Inform. Stefan Priebsch
http://www.e-novative.de
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Deve
On 10.07.2007 01:48, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
And I think that we shouldn't, since it removes a big incentive for
people to move to PHP 6.
I don't really see much sense in forcing people to use PHP6 if we accept the "PHP5 =
PHP6 - Unicode" formula.
They are just different things, period.
Reall
I know, and I use spl_autoload_register. But then I would blatantly
suggest to remove __autoload() in PHP6 and force SPL to be compiled into
PHP.
I wouldn't go as far as removing it, but definitely would go as far as
not recommending to use it if writing a library or application that
includes
Stanislav Malyshev schrieb:
>> Will there be an exception [as in: special case, not as in: new
>> Exception()] for an __autoload function?
>
> __autoload is actually not that great an idea, as it appears now.
> spl_autoload_register works much better for complicated libraries.
I know, and I use s
And I think that we shouldn't, since it removes a big incentive for
people to move to PHP 6.
Really, we need to get folks to use Unicode natively as much as
possible. It is the way of the future, and not some "obscure
feature", as some here have suggested. This kind of attitude is
precise
As we see now, yes they will be in PHP 6.
-Andrei
On Jul 6, 2007, at 7:28 AM, Stefan Priebsch wrote:
Pierre schrieb:
Namespace is one _very_ important reason. If we need a "marketing"
I agree. But AFAIK namespaces were not supposed to be in PHP6, at
least
not in PHP 6.0. Is there an offi
Yes, backporting major features from PHP 6 to 5 will slow down PHP 6
adoption, and I'd like to avoid it if possible.
There is a way to run two engines side by side, by the way: in
separate instances of Apache. It's really not that complicated.
-Andrei
On Jul 6, 2007, at 6:13 AM, Stefan Pr
header() doesn't have to be the first statement in a file at all. It has to
be called before any data is sent.
On 7/9/07, chris# <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 20:13:23 +0200 (CEST), Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>
>> The
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 20:13:23 +0200 (CEST), Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>
>> The namespace declaration statement must be the very first statement in
>> file.
>
> I thought that was reserved in PHP 6 for the "pragma(encoding=UTF-8);"
> sta
declare(encoding=...) may be used befor or right after namespace
declaration.
Dmitry.
> -Original Message-
> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 10:13 PM
> To: Dmitry Stogov
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Simple Namespace P
Once again, you're trying to work with bytes inside Unicode strings,
which just does not make sense. What do you propose we do, somehow
automatically detect that you used \x inside a Unicode string and
turn it into a binary one? Or simply allow one to stick any byte
sequence inside what is
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Note that multiple files in namespace won't allow autoloading.
That got me confused a bit. I was wondering whether the following would
work (with autoload):
In file "a/b.php":
in file "a/c.php":
In file "a/d.php":
in file "a/e.php":
in "
That's why I proposed (privately) to Dmitry to use declare() for
namespace declaration.
-Andrei
On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
The namespace declaration statement must be the very first
statement in
file.
I thought that was
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> The namespace declaration statement must be the very first statement in
> file.
I thought that was reserved in PHP 6 for the "pragma(encoding=UTF-8);"
statement? Which of the two needs to be first, and which second?
regards,
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
Will there be an exception [as in: special case, not as in: new
Exception()] for an __autoload function?
__autoload is actually not that great an idea, as it appears now.
spl_autoload_register works much better for complicated libraries.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PR
I agree, FWIW.
-Andrei
On Jul 9, 2007, at 12:49 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
+1 for braces.
function super_common_function_every_namespace_in_my_project_uses
(){
}
namespace A::B {
function foo() {
//arcana of A::B stuff
}
}
?>
That's what I would like to avoid. Bec
I am going to commit this patch on Wednesday.
Thanks. Dmitry.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dmitry Stogov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 4:46 PM
> To: 'internals@lists.php.net'
> Subject: Simple Namespace Proposal
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Please review the following co
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Priebsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 6:17 PM
> To: Dmitry Stogov
> Cc: 'Sebastian Bergmann'; internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Simple Namespace Proposal
>
>
> Dmitry,
>
> >>> Note that multiple files in names
Fine with me.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jani Taskinen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 4:27 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] --enable-versioning goes bye bye..
>
> If nobody has any objections, I'm going to remove the
> --enable-versioning
Stanislav Malyshev schrieb:
>> function super_common_function_every_namespace_in_my_project_uses(){
>> }
>>
>> namespace A::B {
> That's what I would like to avoid. Because if you need namespaces, then
> you want to segment your naming space. If you in the same time pollute
> the global space
Dmitry,
>>> Note that multiple files in namespace won't allow autoloading.
>> Can you please explain why that is so?
>
> Now autoloading maps class name into file name, however if you have several
> classes in one file, only one of them may be autoloaded(). The same with
> namespaces.
Did you co
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 12:44:09PM +0200, Marco wrote:
> >What might be nice is a patch to PHP4 that provides a bit in
> >error_reporting
> >that would cause warnings on stuff that might break on a move to PHP5.
> >
> >Someone could then switch it on and look at what is logged. I suspect that
> >ma
I was actually referring to a transition from PHP4 to PHP5. As I
originally
stated; there was not a smooth transition - PHP4 is almost nothing like
PHP5.
So, what I really meant; was that the difference between the two is quite
stark.
I'm not quite sure what you mean about the transition? I ca
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 12:44:09PM +0200, Marco wrote:
> >What might be nice is a patch to PHP4 that provides a bit in
> >error_reporting
> >that would cause warnings on stuff that might break on a move to PHP5.
> >
> >Someone could then switch it on and look at what is logged. I suspect that
> >ma
What might be nice is a patch to PHP4 that provides a bit in
error_reporting
that would cause warnings on stuff that might break on a move to PHP5.
Someone could then switch it on and look at what is logged. I suspect that
many people would also be pleasantly surprised that 4 -> 5 is not as hard
If nobody has any objections, I'm going to remove the
--enable-versioning configure option altogether. It lost it's meaning
since PHP 5 was releases and you haven't been able to really use it for
what it was meant for since. (ie. enable running PHP4 + PHP5 as modules
in same server)
It causes a lo
The trouble is that many PHP scripts dynamically include other files
and variables being dynamically typed ... you really need to run the
script to see what happens.
Good point!
I wonder if something like this could be added to xdebug or a new extension?
TBH I like the idea just dont really th
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 11:49:42 +0200, Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> FWIW The boxen I get my mail on is running PHP4 and I have absolutely
>> no trouble with unicode support in my mail (to or from).
>
>
>
> The unicode changes in PHP6 are a little more complicated than that and
> change
Alain Williams wrote:
[snip]
> What might be nice is a patch to PHP4 that provides a bit in error_reporting
> that would cause warnings on stuff that might break on a move to PHP5.
>
> Someone could then switch it on and look at what is logged. I suspect that
> many people would also be pleasant
PHP 6 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (47 total including feature requests)
===[*General Issues]==
26771 Suspended register_tick_funtions crash under threaded webservers
27372 Verified parse error loadin
You can do that already with PHP 4 as well if your script is in UTF-8:
Scary! :-D
Regards
Marco
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 10:46:52 +0100, Alain Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:35:30AM +0200, Marco wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >I will venture to say that the biggest issue was; no transition period.
>>
>>
>> I dont think the transition period is a reason for lack of migratio
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Marco wrote:
> although I guess i'm not looking forward to reading php code that
> says
>
> function 北方话/北方話()
> {
> echo "Hello world ";
> }
You can do that already with PHP 4 as well if your script is in UTF-8:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat unicode.php
[EMAIL PROTECTE
FWIW The boxen I get my mail on is running PHP4 and I have absolutely
no trouble with unicode support in my mail (to or from).
The unicode changes in PHP6 are a little more complicated than that and
change how most of the engine works, this is a good thing IMO as native
unicode support is vit
On 7/9/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'd suggest something close to what Rasmus suggested:
> a) We make a clear statement on PHP.net that at the end of the year we
> plan to discontinue bug fixes for PHP 4 except for security fixes.
> b)
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:35:30AM +0200, Marco wrote:
> >
> >
> >I will venture to say that the biggest issue was; no transition period.
>
>
> I dont think the transition period is a reason for lack of migration 3 years
> is a pretty long time!. the biggest issue is lack of support in popular
>
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 13:11:46 +0400, "Alexey Zakhlestin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 7/9/07, chris# <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> FWIW The boxen I get my mail on is running PHP4 and I have absolutely
>> no trouble with unicode support in my mail (to or from).
>
> did you try sorting? comp
I will venture to say that the biggest issue was; no transition period.
I dont think the transition period is a reason for lack of migration 3 years
is a pretty long time!. the biggest issue is lack of support in popular
applications, I can't tell you the number of time's i've spoken to a
ho
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 17:21:07 -0400, "David Coallier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/8/07, Tomas Kuliavas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, then I guess we have no choice but to declare official PHP 4
>> end-of-life
>> to be on 8:08:08 pm too :) Now we only need to choose a sui
On 7/9/07, chris# <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FWIW The boxen I get my mail on is running PHP4 and I have absolutely
no trouble with unicode support in my mail (to or from).
did you try sorting? comparison between string which use different
unicode-normalisation forms?
I guess that wouldn't work
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 15:18:29 +0200, Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My thought about php4->php6 migration was that when php6 is out to
>> encourage (or more correctly said almost enforce - with the proper
>> announcement for EOL on the php.net) the php4 users to upgrade directly
> to
>> php6
PHP 4 Bug Database summary - http://bugs.php.net
Num Status Summary (640 total including feature requests)
===[*Directory/Filesystem functions]
40661 Open cwd is reset when shutdown handler runs
===
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:21:28 +0300 (EEST), "Tomas Kuliavas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> I have my arguments. One of them is because you keep mantaining PHP4
>> for a long time.
>> If you had "found a very dangerous issue in PHP4 that could not be
>> resolved without moving to PHP5", I think th
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 20:01:22 +0200, Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
>
>
> I think we have all asked that very same question and the answer is a mix
> of
> a few standard issues.
I will venture to say that the biggest iss
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I'd suggest something close to what Rasmus suggested:
> a) We make a clear statement on PHP.net that at the end of the year we
> plan to discontinue bug fixes for PHP 4 except for security fixes.
> b) We will discontinue supporting PHP 4 on 8/8/8 (because
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:53:58 +0300, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why keep supporting PHP 4 then?
>
Why keep "top posting"? It makes no sense.
> Stanislav Malyshev kirjoitti:
>>> I'd be more for dropping all support whatsoever by the end of this
>>> year and focus totally on PHP
On 7/9/07, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anybody who actually NEEDS Unicode ought to be the ones who have to
type a new keyword or something, not the bazillion users who have no
need for Unicode and likely never will...
I wonder whom do you mean here.
I can't remember many non-unico
Make a request to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is a Turkish translation
(http://www.php.net/manual/tr/index.php), but it is defunct as the
preface was last made on 17th July 2004.
On 09/07/07, Bugra Yazar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greetings,
I'm using Php over 5 years and I really would like to
Unicode code points can be defined with \u, but PHP6 breaks
existing octal and hex escape sequences.
>>
>> I don't understand what this means...
>
> I think I know...
>
> I have code like this, somewhere:
>
> if (preg_match("|[\xF0-\xFF]|", $data)){
> $data = un_microsuck($data);
> }
>
It adds only the Unicode feature that a tiny niche market needs,
because everything else will be back-ported to PHP 5.
I'm not sure assumption that unicode is needed only for "tiny niche
market" is entirely correct.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www
Maybe strings should be UTF-8 until declared otherwise or something,
because this just won't fly...
UTF8 would not help you with bits (since nobody guarantees you incoming
data is valid UTF-8) and it's impossible to do any unicode stuff on
utf-8 - you'd have to convert it to utf-16 and back on
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:30:06 +0300, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nevermind the wording, just as soon as we just put a notice on php.net that
> the
> "end is near, prepare yourselves" the sooner hosting companies, etc.
> realize the
> end is really near.. :)
>
> I'd be more for dro
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:32:50 +0200 (CEST), Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ladies, Gentlemen, Kings and Princesses,
> >
> > With the nice PHP 5 / PHP 6 unicode semantics thread under way I am
> > trying to gauge what people feel about dropping support for PHP 4 at the
> > end of t
+1 for braces.
That's what I would like to avoid. Because if you need namespaces, then
you want to segment your naming space. If you in the same time pollute
the global space with non-namespaced function names, the whole namespace
business is kind of meaningless. Or you want your library no
On Fri, July 6, 2007 11:48 am, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> On 06.07.2007 20:44, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>>> You don't by a Porsche if you need a taxi, why would you install
>>> PHP6 if
>>> you don't need Unicode?
>>
>> Namespaces ;)
>
> This reason is only valid if we don't backport such things from P
On Sun, July 8, 2007 2:58 am, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> -1 for braces and multiple namespaces per file
>
> Braces will allow define something outside namespace and I like to
> avoid
> this possibility.
> In the following "correct" example function bar() is defined in global
> namespace.
>
> namespac
On 7/9/07, Cristian Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some Linux distributors will certainly
> take care of php5 for an even longer period.
Yes, about 6 or 7 years more.
I meant PHP4, but I fear that your answer will be the same :)
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Ma
On Fri, July 6, 2007 1:23 am, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> You mean this will break:
>>
>> > $mask = 0xf0;
>> $value = $_POST['foo'] & $mask;
>> ?>
>>
>> because of Unicode?
>
> I'd say it won't do what it did before. Though I'm not sure bit
> operations on unicode make any sense at all... The
-1
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:32:50 +0200 (CEST), Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ladies, Gentlemen, Kings and Princesses,
>
> With the nice PHP 5 / PHP 6 unicode semantics thread under way I am
> trying to gauge what people feel about dropping support for PHP 4 at the
> end of this yea
79 matches
Mail list logo
