It's nice but as long as the browsers don't implement it natively then it's
less useful for server to client communication.
Of course can still be quite useful with custom I/O or data sources that
implement it natively i.e. mongodb.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:i
On Friday, November 26, 2010, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:25:32 -, Peter Lind wrote:
>
>
> It seems fairly handy and I've been in situations where I wanted to do
> something like that - in fact, I use factories to achieve something
> similar.
> However, the more I use it, t
On 11/26/10 12:58 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> Only that it has no technical or features-
>> wise reasons to do so
>
> Substantial engine level improvements and a couple of new language level
> features (it's pushing it a bit, I agree, but not that much)
I think the next major version should be us
+1 :)
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> c
Hi!
huge +1 from me ;-) It might be worth adding function call chaining
with dereferencing and instance method call chaning, like $a =
function(){ return function(){ echo 'Hello'; }; }; $a()();
See: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/fcallfcall
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://w
Hi Felipe
2010/11/26 Felipe Pena :
> Other examples which describes the feature at
> http://wiki.php.net/rfc/instance-method-call
>
> Thoughts?
huge +1 from me ;-) It might be worth adding function call chaining
with dereferencing and instance method call chaning, like $a =
function(){ return fun
+1
Good job felipe
On 26 November 2010 14:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
>
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class f
On Friday, November 26, 2010, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:25:32 -, Peter Lind wrote:
>
>
> It seems fairly handy and I've been in situations where I wanted to do
> something like that - in fact, I use factories to achieve something
> similar.
> However, the more I use it, t
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:25:32 -, Peter Lind
wrote:
It seems fairly handy and I've been in situations where I wanted to do
something like that - in fact, I use factories to achieve something
similar.
However, the more I use it, the more it feels like introducing code
smells into my code. Y
On 11/26/2010 2:36 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
Hi all,
I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
on same command.
Example:
bar()->x); // string(3) "PHP"
?>
Other examples which describes the featur
November-26-10 2:36 PM, Felipe Pena writes:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its
> properties on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class foo e
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > 3. The motivation to skip 6 doesn't stem from marketing at all. The main
> motivation is that there's a VERY concrete perception amongst many users
> about what PHP 6 is.
>
> Leaving
Zeev Suraski wrote:
that's the crowd I referenced to. The users I discuss too, in locale conference,
> UG, enterprises, etc. never heard or only vaguely about php6. Or they heard
> about it while seeing a book called "PHP 6 and mysql 6" or something stupid
> like that;).
I've yet to meet some
> that's the crowd I referenced to. The users I discuss too, in locale
> conference,
> UG, enterprises, etc. never heard or only vaguely about php6. Or they heard
> about it while seeing a book called "PHP 6 and mysql 6" or something stupid
> like that ;).
I've yet to meet someone in the last few
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I disagree. Google for "PHP 6". I've received tons of questions about it
> from non-core-community attendees to conferences.
that's the crowd I referenced to. The users I discuss too, in locale
conference, UG, enterprises, etc. never hear
> Only that it has no technical or features-
> wise reasons to do so
Substantial engine level improvements and a couple of new language level
features (it's pushing it a bit, I agree, but not that much)
> but brings its lots of risks with it.
I fail to see how changing a version number brings a
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Peter Lind wrote:
> On 26 November 2010 21:37, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Peter Lind
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 26 November 2010 20:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> > I'm here again to presents another proposal, which
2010/11/26 Johannes Schlüter
> On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 17:36 -0200, Felipe Pena wrote:
> > var_dump(new foo()->bar()->x); // string(3) "PHP"
>
> It has some readability issues. One might assume it is
>
>new (foo()->bar()->x)
>
> not
>
>(new foo())->bar()->x
>
> As there is a mandatory space
On 26 November 2010 21:37, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Peter Lind wrote:
>>
>> On 26 November 2010 20:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
>> > instantiating a class and calling its methods an
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Peter Lind wrote:
> On 26 November 2010 20:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> > instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its
> properties
> > on same command.
> >
> > Exa
On 26 November 2010 20:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class foo exte
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class f
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 17:36 -0200, Felipe Pena wrote:
> var_dump(new foo()->bar()->x); // string(3) "PHP"
It has some readability issues. One might assume it is
new (foo()->bar()->x)
not
(new foo())->bar()->x
As there is a mandatory space between "new" and its operand and no space
in f
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 14:36, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
> Example:
>
>
> class bar {
> public $x = 'PHP';
> }
>
> class foo
+1
Seems like a handy change and the patch is quite manageable.
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
> instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
> on same command.
>
>
Hi all,
I'm here again to presents another proposal, which adds support for
instantiating a class and calling its methods and accessing its properties
on same command.
Example:
bar()->x); // string(3) "PHP"
?>
Other examples which describes the feature at
http://wiki.php.net/rfc/instance-method
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I'll begin again by saying I don't feel strongly about renaming 5.4 as 7.0,
> but there are some important points worth bringing up:
>
> 1. The motivation for changing major version numbers was *never* BC breakage.
> It was substantial lan
> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 7:21 PM
> To: Zeev Suraski
> Cc: Ilia Alshanetsky; Johannes Schlüter; Andi Gutmans; Jani Taskinen;
> da...@php.net; PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Hold off 5.4
>
> On Fri, N
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 3:03 AM
>>> To: Ilia Alshanetsky
>>> Cc: Zeev Suraski; Johannes Schlüte
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 3:03 AM
>> To: Ilia Alshanetsky
>> Cc: Zeev Suraski; Johannes Schlüter; Andi Gutmans; Jani Taskinen;
>> da...@php.net; PHP Intern
> -Original Message-
> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:der...@php.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 12:00 PM
> To: Kalle Sommer Nielsen
> Cc: Zeev Suraski; Johannes Schlüter; Andi Gutmans; Jani Taskinen;
> da...@php.net; PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Hold off 5.4
>
> On Fri,
> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 3:03 AM
> To: Ilia Alshanetsky
> Cc: Zeev Suraski; Johannes Schlüter; Andi Gutmans; Jani Taskinen;
> da...@php.net; PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Hold off 5.4
>
> That can
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> >> This doesn't seem the ideal time to introduce a new toolchain, so
> >> sticking with SVN, we should maintain 4 branches, 5.2 (security only),
> >> 5.3 (bug fixes + security), 5.4 (agreed upon
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
> 2010/11/25 Zeev Suraski :
> > I think that skipping to a major version is a good idea.
> >
> > Two key reasons I think that:
> >
> > 1. It'll help us break the evil spell of the 6 version number.
> > Honestly, I'm not so certain we'll have majo
35 matches
Mail list logo
