hi,
some non-php-dev comments in case they're helpful...
On Monday 15 October 2007 12:13:50 am Wez Furlong wrote:
> This bug has been open for a while:
> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=27792
> Having run into this issue recently, here's a patch (hopefully
> attached, mail.app and list filters wi
On 13.10.2007, at 18:46, Hans Moog wrote:
Will method overloading by method signature be implemented in php6 or
even php 5.3?
this feature isnt php .. or rather its a solution to a problem that
does not exist in php .. for good reason.
regards,
Lukas
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Develo
This bug has been open for a while:
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=27792
Having run into this issue recently, here's a patch (hopefully
attached, mail.app and list filters willing) against PHP 5.3 to
address it.
This patch will promote to double the file sizes that overflow
LONG_MAX, which
Hello Martin,
using the $Revision: $ keyword is enough. Also it looks like you're having
a white space issue.
marcus
Friday, October 12, 2007, 5:54:53 PM, you wrote:
> Index: pdo_mysql/pdo_mysql.c
> ===
> RCS file: /repository/
Hello Hans,
Sunday, October 14, 2007, 1:11:35 PM, you wrote:
> I will do so, but i will have to modify it to work with the current php
> version and I wanted to know if everybody hates this way of method
> overloading first.
> Btw: We made some benchmark tests when we decided to use it. And the
Btw: We made some benchmark tests when we decided to use it. And the
method calls were about 0.1 Percent slower. But without having to
check or escape every parameter anymore it even boosts performance
If you think parameter typing would free you from having input
validation, IMHO you are on a
But if you want to be more strict and limit the coder to use your
functions only with a specific parameter signature (and thats the
The purpose of signature overloading in most languages isn't input type
control, it's different functionality on different types. However,
unlike many other langu
Hans Moog wrote:
You are missing something. Using this new feature would be
voluntarily (it is optional like type hints are already).
Thanks for bringing that up right after I told you that I won't accept
this argument ;-)
If you want to code the old way and you don't want to force coders t
Hans Moog wrote:
> Kcachegrind doesn't show the function signature in the callgraph because the
> parameter signature is not part of the function signature. If the parameter
> siganture would be moved into the function signature, kcachegrind would adept
> and show it.
>
> Btw: You don't have to
Maintaining an official, bundled PHP extension:
pdo_firebird and maybe php_interbase
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Kcachegrind doesn't show the function signature in the callgraph because the
parameter signature is not part of the function signature. If the parameter
siganture would be moved into the function signature, kcachegrind would adept
and show it.
Btw: You don't have to use it if you don't want to.
You are missing something. Using this new feature would be voluntarily (it is
optional like type hints are already).
If you want to code the old way and you don't want to force coders to use your
functions correctly, you could leave out typehints an check the parameters
manually.
But if you wa
Christian Schneider wrote:
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> If you have such a patch you should definitively post it here so
>> that we
>> can hve a look. Most interesting to us is however the oerformance
>> impact. As
>> that was the main reason to go any further than adding return type hints.
>
> Am
Marcus Boerger wrote:
If you have such a patch you should definitively post it here so that we
can hve a look. Most interesting to us is however the oerformance impact. As
that was the main reason to go any further than adding return type hints.
Am I the only here who thinks that performance
I will do so, but i will have to modify it to work with the current php version
and I wanted to know if everybody hates this way of method overloading first.
Btw: We made some benchmark tests when we decided to use it. And the method
calls were about 0.1 Percent slower. But without having to che
As long as you only got one method per name it doesn't change things, so it
wouldn't brake backward compatibility and old functions would still behave like
expected (so it is not incompatible).
But if you want to be more strict and limit the coder to use your functions
only with a specific para
On 10/14/07, Hans Moog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It shows an error that fun1 is not implemented for the signature of the
> passed parameters.
>
> But you could still provide a method that matches any number and type of
> parameters by adding the following method declaration.
Well, this looks
Hello Hans,
If you have such a patch you should definitively post it here so that we
can hve a look. Most interesting to us is however the oerformance impact. As
that was the main reason to go any further than adding return type hints.
marcus
Saturday, October 13, 2007, 10:47:23 PM, you wrote:
18 matches
Mail list logo
