The proposed solution (basic types flag) is probably the lesser evil,
but I still feel were are taking things to far and current operation
is correct.
On 16-Dec-08, at 6:57 AM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
Richard Quadling wrote:
2008/12/15 mike :
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf
Hi.
On 15.12.2008 18:50 Uhr, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Ok, so as promised I ran some of the options we have that came up last
week by Douglas Crockford.
1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various JSON
p
1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various JSON
parsers, you have to pass it a PHP array or object.
+1
Regards,
Stan Vassilev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe,
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Ok, so as promised I ran some of the options we have that came up last
> week by Douglas Crockford.
>
> 1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
> spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various J
Settings which change behaviour like that aren't really all that fun
for third party/portable applications developers, e.g. forum software
and the likes. magic_quotes_gpc and others are good examples of this.
Going back to Rasmus' mail based on his discussion with Douglas, I
think that option #1 (
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Richard Quadling
wrote:
> Would it be at all possible to have an ini setting json.strict_encode = On
>
> So, my code doesn't change, but I can activate it globally.
> Essentially I don't want to shoot myself. I don't want to take the
> safety off.
I think we have
2008/12/16 Scott MacVicar :
> Richard Quadling wrote:
>> 2008/12/15 mike :
>>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>>
1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various JSON
pars
On 12/16/2008 14:23, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 3:20 PM, troels knak-nielsen wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
For now I'll be leaving it as is and adding a JSON_STRICT_ENCODE
parameter to the options flag. So you can use
json_encode($var,
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 3:20 PM, troels knak-nielsen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
>> For now I'll be leaving it as is and adding a JSON_STRICT_ENCODE
>> parameter to the options flag. So you can use
>>
>> json_encode($var, JSON_STRICT_ENCODE);
>>
>
> I'm really
troels knak-nielsen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
>> For now I'll be leaving it as is and adding a JSON_STRICT_ENCODE
>> parameter to the options flag. So you can use
>>
>> json_encode($var, JSON_STRICT_ENCODE);
>>
>
> I'm really not a fan of named constants to
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
> For now I'll be leaving it as is and adding a JSON_STRICT_ENCODE
> parameter to the options flag. So you can use
>
> json_encode($var, JSON_STRICT_ENCODE);
>
I'm really not a fan of named constants to change the semantics of a
function lik
Richard Quadling wrote:
> 2008/12/15 mike :
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>>
>>> 1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
>>> spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various JSON
>>> parsers, you have to pass it a PHP array
2008/12/15 mike :
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> 1. Document the fact that if you want to strictly conform to the JSON
>> spec and be sure your json_encode output will work in various JSON
>> parsers, you have to pass it a PHP array or object.
>
> Instead of json
2008/12/16 Pierre Joye :
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Richard Quadling
> wrote:
>
>> Jessie. Hopefully my bug and test code will show the problem. I'm
>> using 5.2.8 with no problem. This is very much a 5.3.x problem. One
>> which is stopping me from doing any sort of testing of my code on
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Richard Quadling
wrote:
> Jessie. Hopefully my bug and test code will show the problem. I'm
> using 5.2.8 with no problem. This is very much a 5.3.x problem. One
> which is stopping me from doing any sort of testing of my code on
> 5.3.x. Putting it simply, 5.3.a
2008/12/13 Jessie Hernandez :
> Richard Quadling wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> I'm looking to test 5.3, but I stumble at the first hurdle as the ini
>> file is not being read.
>>
>> Windows XP Pro SP3 and Windows Server 2005/2008.
>>
>> 2008-12-12 15:45:36 D:\Personal
>> Files\Downloads\Software\Programmi
16 matches
Mail list logo
