Isn't this need basically covered by accessors?
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented
- Rasmus
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:53 PM, wrote:
> From: Sebastian Krebs
> To: PHP internals list
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 13:34:58 +0100
> Subject: Abstract properties
> Hi,
>
>
Submitted here: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=63666
Also note that this can probably be back-ported into other 5.x
branches where this is applicable. I have only personally checked out
the latest release branch at this time.
Thanks!
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Christopher Jones
wrote:
>
>
On 12/01/2012 10:21 AM, Paul Taulborg wrote:
[php_date.c patch]
Thanks for the patch. To ensure it isn't lost, can you open a bug at
https://bugs.php.net/ and attach it? And/or submit a pull request at
https://github.com/php/php-src
Regards,
Chris
--
christopher.jo...@oracle.com
http://
--- php-5.4.9_orig/ext/date/php_date.c 2012-11-20 23:12:20.0 -0600
+++ php-5.4.9/ext/date/php_date.c 2012-12-01 05:38:22.136264276 -0600
@@ -948,6 +948,7 @@
timelib_time_offset *offset = NULL;
timelib_sll isoweek, isoyear;
int rfc_co
My apologies, pasting the patch in directly:
--- php-5.4.9_orig/ext/date/php_date.c 2012-11-20 23:12:20.0 -0600
+++ php-5.4.9/ext/date/php_date.c 2012-12-01 05:38:22.136264276 -0600
@@ -948,6 +948,7 @@
timelib_time_offset *offset = NULL;
timelib_sll isoweek,
Hi,
2012/12/1 Paul Taulborg
> I am migrating from 4.4.9 to some new servers I built out, and wrote a
> benchmark suite that is testing many individual aspects of PHP so I
> could see what sort of performance benefits I might see not only from
> the new server, but moving off my custom forked 4.4
I am migrating from 4.4.9 to some new servers I built out, and wrote a
benchmark suite that is testing many individual aspects of PHP so I
could see what sort of performance benefits I might see not only from
the new server, but moving off my custom forked 4.4.9 branch. Here's a
snippet of some of
