Tijnema wrote:
Yes, that's what I meant to say, they can be implemented on top of,
just like the above mentioned json, it is implemented on top of too.
But, that means that a regular PHP programmer doesn't need PHP5 for
his scripts (except for OO if they want). Do you think it matters to
them if
Because he's Richard. He always does that. You should see him on
php-general. :-)
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Olivier Hill wrote:
> Is there a reason why the last 10 messages on this thread are coming from
> you?
>
> It might just be me, but answering in the same email would be great.
>
> Olivie
But some functions ARE so super-common, across the board, that I just
plain don't want them buried in some namespace...
Sure, why not put them into separate file then? I understand we're
forcing some structure here, but I think actually it's good - and many
other languages have it either by de
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Jeff Griffiths wrote:
> If you're writing an app that does a lot of json or xml parsing or
> output, *even if you don't use the class keyword anywhere in your own
> code* PHP5 is a better language than PHP4. Drupal is a great example of
> this because even though Drupal
>> 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_m
chris# wrote:
>> It was possible to have PHP3 and PHP4 both as modules, I think, but
>> that was an anomoly?
> So which one of the developers broke this /feature/ in 5? ;)
This wasn't supported on all platforms in 4 either because it relied on
the ability to created versioned shared libs. It was
Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Tue, July 10, 2007 7:06 pm, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> If 90% of the strings in use would work fine if treated as unicode,
>> then it
>> would make sense to just always assume Unicode unless explicitly
>> specified
>> otherwise.
>
> If that 10% includes enough users who hav
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:25:32 -0500 (CDT), "Richard Lynch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, July 11, 2007 6:13 pm, Tijnema wrote:
>> On 7/12/07, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
>>> (one version or all of them, one
Is there a reason why the last 10 messages on this thread are coming from you?
It might just be me, but answering in the same email would be great.
Olivier
On 7/11/07, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Seems to me...
Both need to be done.
Do both, or pick one if you can't do both, and
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Richard Lynch wrote:
> And did I dream the thread on this way back when where it was stated
> that Unicode was backwards-compatible, so this wouldn't be a problem?
>
> Yet now it seems that UTF-16 is *not* backwards-compatible, and this
> seems like a pretty big problem
Seems to me...
Both need to be done.
Do both, or pick one if you can't do both, and somebody else will do
the other. That's how FLOSS works. :-)
On Wed, July 11, 2007 12:33 am, Evert | Rooftop wrote:
> One final question..
>
> should I assume while converting code "unicode.semantics" is on or
>
On Tue, July 10, 2007 11:30 am, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> What I really think we need to do for this release, which we haven't
> been good at doing in the past, is build a PHP Compatibility Team
> which
> tries to port many applications to PHP 6 and finds the issues in doing
> this port (both with unic
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 01:13:33 +0200, Tijnema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/12/07, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
>> (one version or all of them, one can be module of course) and define the
>> required PHP version b
On Mon, July 9, 2007 5:24 pm, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
> I also think we shouldn't backport features to PHP5. We should
I believe the only serious reason FOR this is if you want to drop the
semantics OFF in PHP 6...
If getting new features requires upgrading to 6 and taking the Unicode
stuff t
On Tue, July 10, 2007 7:06 pm, Larry Garfield wrote:
> If 90% of the strings in use would work fine if treated as unicode,
> then it
> would make sense to just always assume Unicode unless explicitly
> specified
> otherwise.
If that 10% includes enough users who have written millions of line of
co
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 20:57 -0400, David Coallier wrote:
>
> If you want to do functional programming then go ahead, if you want to
> do OOP, then do real OOP, not sub-oop or some php4-oop.
Pray tell... what exactly is "real OOP"? This sounds like it might be
something extremely subjective and po
On Wed, July 11, 2007 7:57 pm, David Coallier wrote:
> If you want to do functional programming then go ahead, if you want to
> do OOP, then do real OOP, not sub-oop or some php4-oop.
Many users, for many tasks, have absolutely zero need to do any OOP at
all.
And bloating their PHP for OOP they d
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 19:54 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Wed, July 11, 2007 7:48 pm, Jeff Griffiths wrote:
> > Richard Lynch wrote:
> >> On Wed, July 11, 2007 4:40 pm, Tijnema wrote:
> >>> Except for the OO, I don't see anything that can't be done in PHP4,
> >>> while it can be done in PHP5. So
On Wed, July 11, 2007 3:11 am, Richard Quadling wrote:
> On 11/07/07, Evert | Rooftop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Larry Garfield wrote:
>> >
>> > Top 10 by what metric? If I had to guess based on market share,
>> I'd say
>> > (unordered):
>> >
>> > Drupal
>> > Squirrelmail
>> > WordPress
>> > ph
On Mon, July 9, 2007 1:41 pm, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> Once again, you're trying to work with bytes inside Unicode strings,
> which just does not make sense.
>From our perspective, you've gone and changed a fundamental data
structure out from under us, in a non-backwards-compatible way, and
broken
On 7/11/07, Tijnema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/11/07, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> chris# wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:30:26 -0500, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ...
> >> The claim that is still repeated
> >> that one "has to" rewrite everything to be OO in
On Mon, July 9, 2007 3:13 am, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
> 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...
On Mon, July 9, 2007 3:07 am, Tomas Kuliavas wrote:
> 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("|
On Mon, July 9, 2007 3:06 am, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> But now \xF0 isn't going to be ASCII 128 anymore, is it?
>
> ASCII doesn't have any characters beyond 0x7f AFAIK, but it doesn't
> matter, I get what you mean. \xF0 in unicode mode would be U+00F0 of
> course. Now how preg_match should hand
On 7/11/07, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, July 9, 2007 4:58 pm, Stefan Priebsch 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.
Deprecate in 6, remove in 7 might be
On Wed, July 11, 2007 7:48 pm, Jeff Griffiths wrote:
> Richard Lynch wrote:
>> On Wed, July 11, 2007 4:40 pm, Tijnema wrote:
>>> Except for the OO, I don't see anything that can't be done in PHP4,
>>> while it can be done in PHP5. Some workarounds are maybe needed,
>>> but
>>> it mostly doesn't req
Richard Lynch wrote:
On Wed, July 11, 2007 4:40 pm, Tijnema wrote:
Except for the OO, I don't see anything that can't be done in PHP4,
while it can be done in PHP5. Some workarounds are maybe needed, but
it mostly doesn't require more than 10 lines of PHP code extra.
The SOAP / XML stuff is li
On Mon, July 9, 2007 4:58 pm, Stefan Priebsch 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.
Deprecate in 6, remove in 7 might be a better strategy...
Otherwise you'll hear: "Oh, I ca
On Mon, July 9, 2007 2:49 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 a
On Wed, July 11, 2007 4:40 pm, Tijnema wrote:
> Except for the OO, I don't see anything that can't be done in PHP4,
> while it can be done in PHP5. Some workarounds are maybe needed, but
> it mostly doesn't require more than 10 lines of PHP code extra.
The SOAP / XML stuff is like night and day.
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 01:22 +0200, Tijnema wrote:
> Yes, that's what I meant to say, they can be implemented on top of,
> just like the above mentioned json, it is implemented on top of too.
You can also use Assembler for doing anything PHP can do - and chances
are high that this is faster than us
On Tue, July 10, 2007 4:49 pm, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>> I'd like to commit the attached patch which should always enable
>> mail(),
>> any objections?
+1
I don't see any reason why I should have to install sendmail before I
install PHP.
PHP is way more important than sendmail, after all. :-)
It'
On Wed, July 11, 2007 6:13 pm, Tijnema wrote:
> On 7/12/07, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
>> (one version or all of them, one can be module of course) and define
>> the
>> required PHP version by the file suffix..
>>
>>
Hi
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 01:13 +0200, Tijnema wrote:
>
> I know this is possible, and I believe it is possible in Apache too
> with some kind of hack?
> But this still doesn't solve a lot of problems, but will generate a
> lot more with portable code. Take a bulletin board for example, there
> ar
Hi Tijnema,
I think here is something that might interest you:
http://www.phpclasses.org/browse/package/3472.html
Regards,
On 7/11/07, Tijnema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/12/07, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
>
On 7/12/07, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tijnema wrote:
> On 7/11/07, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
>> - file_get_contents()
> PHP 4 >= 4.3.0, PHP 5
D'oh! Thanks for the history lesson.
;)
>> - simplexml / DOM parsing / libxml2
>> - json_encode|decode
> JSON
On 7/12/07, Jani Taskinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
(one version or all of them, one can be module of course) and define the
required PHP version by the file suffix..
--Jani
Hello Jani:
I know this is possible, and I believe i
A lot easier (and works already) is to install PHP as CGI/FastCGI
(one version or all of them, one can be module of course) and define the
required PHP version by the file suffix..
--Jani
Tijnema kirjoitti:
Hello developers,
The thread about dropping support for PHP4 gave me a new idea, havi
Tijnema wrote:
On 7/11/07, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
- file_get_contents()
PHP 4 >= 4.3.0, PHP 5
D'oh! Thanks for the history lesson.
- simplexml / DOM parsing / libxml2
- json_encode|decode
JSON PECL extension can be installed for PHP >= 4.3.0
It *can* be, but it
Hello developers,
The thread about dropping support for PHP4 gave me a new idea, having
multiple PHP versions to be loaded by the Apache2handler SAPI.
The idea:
I was thinking about something like the shebang(#!) line used in
bash/perl/python and even PHP scripts. But this time not for the
progr
On 7/11/07, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
chris# wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:30:26 -0500, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
>> The claim that is still repeated
>> that one "has to" rewrite everything to be OO in order to port to PHP 5
>> is,
>> quite simply, FUD.
> Tr
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:43:19 -0700, "David Wang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, everyone. My name is David Wang and I am one of the students
> participating in Google Summer of Code this year. As you may remember,
> my project is to implement a garbage collector for circular references
> in
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:12:35 -0700, Jeff Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> chris# wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:30:26 -0500, Larry Garfield
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
>>> The claim that is still repeated
>>> that one "has to" rewrite everything to be OO in order to port to PHP 5
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:06:02 +0200, Sebastian Mendel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1
>
> Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
>
>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
>
> it was badly advertised!
Can't argue with that. :)
>
> most people don't even know how much faster
Hello, everyone. My name is David Wang and I am one of the students
participating in Google Summer of Code this year. As you may remember,
my project is to implement a garbage collector for circular references
in PHP. As the midterm for Summer of Code is coming up, my mentor,
Derick Rethans, thoug
chris# wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:30:26 -0500, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
The claim that is still repeated
that one "has to" rewrite everything to be OO in order to port to PHP 5
is,
quite simply, FUD.
True. But then again, what's the point of using 5 if you're not incl
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Brian Moon wrote:
> I was just wondering if it was intentional to ignore setlocale() in the new
> DateTime object and its friends? That is a real let down if it was
> intentional. Maybe its just a future feature?
It's intentional for PHP 5.2, not for PHP 6.0. More will come
I was just wondering if it was intentional to ignore setlocale() in the
new DateTime object and its friends? That is a real let down if it was
intentional. Maybe its just a future feature?
--
Brian Moon
Senior Developer
--
http://dealnews.com/
It's good to be chea
Stut schrieb:
> Sebastian Mendel wrote:
>> Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
>>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
>>
>> it was badly advertised!
>>
>> most people don't even know how much faster it is!
>
> Is it really faster? From what I've read over the past few year
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> On 11.07.2007, at 14:06, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
>
> > Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
> >
> > > Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so
> > > bad?
> >
> > it was badly advertised!
> >
> > most people don't even know how much
On 11.07.2007, at 15:11, David Coallier wrote:
On 7/11/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11.07.2007, at 14:06, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
> +1
>
> Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
>
>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is
so bad?
>
> it was badly advertise
On 7/11/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11.07.2007, at 14:06, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
> +1
>
> Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
>
>> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
>
> it was badly advertised!
>
> most people don't even know how much faster it
On 11.07.2007, at 14:06, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
+1
Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
it was badly advertised!
most people don't even know how much faster it is!
to say nothing about of all the new features not known by most
Sebastian Mendel wrote:
Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
it was badly advertised!
most people don't even know how much faster it is!
Is it really faster? From what I've read over the past few years the
general opinion is that i
+1
Guilherme Blanco schrieb:
> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is so bad?
it was badly advertised!
most people don't even know how much faster it is!
to say nothing about of all the new features not known by most developers!
(of course - most people here now them)
la
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 11:36 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 10:00 +0300, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > Just commit the patch. I'll remove the configure stuff for you. :)
>
> Well, I kept the configure stuff to set the default value of the ini
> setting when sendmail is
>> > I think the sooner the better as it's valuable information for the dev
>> > team.
>> > It'd probably be a good idea to have a Wiki where we can document
>> issues
>> > that/common use-cases which are encountered.
>> > Maybe we should have a Wiki on one of the php.net servers for such
>> > purp
Hi,
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 10:00 +0300, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> Just commit the patch. I'll remove the configure stuff for you. :)
Well, I kept the configure stuff to set the default value of the ini
setting when sendmail is found.
johannes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 10:24 +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> this and IIRC the only opposition has always been Rasmus that insists
> that things like this should be in CVS (yes I know we have a todo
> file in CVS). But it seems to me like most internals developers have
> showed their prefere
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:20:44 -0400, Evert | Rooftop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Garfield wrote:
>>
>> Top 10 by what metric? If I had to guess based on market share, I'd say
>> (unordered):
>>
>> Drupal
>> Squirrelmail
>> WordPress
>> phpMyAdmin
>> MediaWiki
>> Joomla
>> PHPBB
>>
>
> Th
The reason I'm doing this is because it seems that Windows parser looks for an
odd number of '"' before the escaping, otherwise the escaping character is
included in the outcome, for example:
string(25) "md "test ^& echo ^%foo^%"" ==> will output a directory called
"test ^& echo ^%foo^%"
Whil
Almost, I want to change the 2nd paragraph to:
Hereby the PHP development team announces that support for PHP 4 will
continue until the end of this year only. After 2007-12-31 there will
be no more releases of PHP 4.4. We will continue to make critical
security
fixes available on a case-b
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 10:21 +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> we tried to get most of the top php OSS projects into the primary
> testers group:
> http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP4yz
> http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP5yz
> http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP6yz
Emphasis on word "tried" ? :D
Is there s
On 11.07.2007, at 00:02, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I think the sooner the better as it's valuable information for the dev
team.
It'd probably be a good idea to have a Wiki where we can document
issues
that/common use-cases which are encountered.
Maybe we should have a Wiki on one of the php.net se
On 11.07.2007, at 07:15, Larry Garfield wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Evert | Rooftop wrote:
Andi Gutmans wrote:
I think the sooner the better as it's valuable information for
the dev
team.
It'd probably be a good idea to have a Wiki where we can document
issues
that/common use-cases w
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Pierre wrote:
> On 7/10/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Pierre wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/9/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'd suggest something close to what Ras
On 11/07/07, Evert | Rooftop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> Top 10 by what metric? If I had to guess based on market share, I'd say
> (unordered):
>
> Drupal
> Squirrelmail
> WordPress
> phpMyAdmin
> MediaWiki
> Joomla
> PHPBB
>
That will keep me busy =)
Evert
Would it
On 7/10/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Pierre wrote:
> 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
No objections from me.
On 11.07.2007 01:25, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
Hi,
recently I had the problem that we disable the mail() function if
configure can't find the sendmail binary. Is there any real reason for
this? I can image a few situations where the binary is in a non-standard
location or
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 00:08 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 00:49 +0300, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > So what happens when sendmail really does not exist?
>
> The same as if you configure sendmail_path wrong or move you binary to a
> host where it is missing: mail() returns fal
70 matches
Mail list logo
