2012.07.24. 7:41, "Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa" ezt
írta:
>
>
> On 23/07/12 06:03, Alex Aulbach wrote:
>>
>> In other words: You want to introduce something, which we are glad not
>> to need anymore. :)
>
> Ok. And as I said, it is a proposal so… ;-).
>
> Next topic: rescue or finally keywoard?
>
For fin
rescue is the exact same concept as catch
On Jul 24, 2012 3:41 PM, "Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa" <
ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 23/07/12 06:03, Alex Aulbach wrote:
>>
>> In other words: You want to introduce something, which we are glad not
>> to need anymore. :)
>
> Ok. And as I said, i
On 23/07/12 06:03, Alex Aulbach wrote:
In other words: You want to introduce something, which we are glad not
to need anymore. :)
Ok. And as I said, it is a proposal so… ;-).
Next topic: rescue or finally keywoard?
Best regards :-).
--
Ivan Enderlin
Developer of Hoa
http://hoa.42/ or http://
Nuked test
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
test
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Why bloat the core library of functions when you can perform: $randomValue
= $array[array_rand($array)]; Am I missing the point?
I don't think there is a real need for this personally it's just language
bloat. Look at Java (I know it's very different) but it provides a huge
amount of "built in" f
On 23 ביול 2012, at 19:05, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>>
>> (resending because of broken formatting)
>>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't
>> really
>> make the case f
Andrew,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
> (resending because of broken formatting)
>
> Hi there,
>
> I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't
> really
> make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal
> (perhaps
> to
On 22/07/12 04:08, Kris Craig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>> If you think 1.1 =/= 1.01 you're sure using some weird version numbers.
>> Only 1.0.1 would be smaller.
>>
>> Has anyone seen these weird version ordering schemes in practise? On any
>> major projects
(resending because of broken formatting)
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't really
make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal (perhaps
too proper?).
Introduction
I am proposing a function, named array_pic
Hi there,
I apologise for my previous email. It was a disorganised mess that didn't really
make the case for that function very well. So here's a proper proposal (perhaps
too proper?).
Introduction
I am proposing a function, named array_pick(), which takes a single (array)
argument, a
2012/7/23 André Rømcke
> I think these two proposals can be synced up, what if:
>
> public readonly $a;
>
> Is shorthand for:
>
> public $a { get; protected set; }
>
>
> And when no function is defined, no function overhead is added.
>
Well, this code:
public read-only $a;
introduces
>
>
> My first thought was how could someone reading the code see, that it
> is a generator?
>
Somewhat snarky answer: By documenting the code in the first place.
Yeah, I know, we all inherit other people's code and the other person never
writes comments.
I don't think this is as big of a proble
On 7/20/12 2:33 AM, "Anthony Ferrara" wrote:
>Hey all,
>
>So I've been thinking about this for a while. Here's what I've come up
>with:
>
>1. We want to maintain loose typing, so implementing a different API on
>string than on int types would be bad.
>
>2. We want to retain backwards compatibili
On 7/16/12 5:29 PM, "Nikita Popov" wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Amaury Bouchard
>wrote:
>> Yes, but only if you have to write an accessor.
>> If you just want an attribute that is:
>> - readable from everywhere
>> - writable from the current class only
>>
>> With my syntax:
>> p
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Alex Aulbach wrote:
> 2012/7/23 Sanford Whiteman <
> swhitemanlistens-softw...@cypressintegrated.com>:
> >> I think that you can compare the situation to the short if syntax ($a >
> $b
> >> ? $c : $d)
> >
> > Not sure I understand... that *is* the situation under d
16 matches
Mail list logo
