Had a bit of a miscommunication problem with our ops contact for the
box. Shouldn't happen again. Everything should be good now.
-Rasmus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> However, I guess this new feature would slow down the parsing process and
> therefore I am against it.
It might slow the process down because on every assignment you have to
make sure it's not a final variable. Until we really know how much
that slows it down, I'm not sure that is much of an iss
In my opinion read-only variables are not the same as constants. You could
do something as following:
final $foo = new Foo();
and that is definitely not the same as a constant.
However, I guess this new feature would slow down the parsing process and
therefore I am against it.
-Ursprünglic
2013/5/28 Sebastian Krebs
>
> And in your example you have to know, that you are "manipulating" a
> variable :?
>
>
Sure. But my example's goal was to show the idea of Lars.
Using the "final" keyword on variables would allow to manipulate variables
and "constant variables", without the need to kn
> > it seems that it will miss even 5.5 final :(
>
> I've worked quite a bit on this and I'm close to finishing. Really need
> just one more transatlantic flight :-) I'll push my changes to a branch.
> I think the RFC gets something wrong though. I'll check and report back
>
> Derick
>
\o/
--
Fe
2013/5/28 Amaury Bouchard
> 2013/5/28 Sebastian Krebs
>
>>print($$b);
>>>
>>
>> print(constant($b));
>>
>
> It's definitely different. In your example you have to know that you are
> manipulating constants only.
>
>
And in your example you have to know, that you are "manipulating" a
variable
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Daniel Convissor <
> dani...@analysisandsolutions.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks:
> >
> > David mentioned the following in the git migration email:
> >
> > >Expect the php-src migration in 14-21 days after 5.4 final.
> >
> > Can 5.4 final
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Lars Strojny wrote:
> Hi Ferenc,
>
> Am 28.05.2013 um 08:15 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs :
> [...]
> >> I would like it to work the same way as it does in java(
> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-4.html#jls-4.12.4)
> >> eg. you can set the initial
2013/5/28 Sebastian Krebs
>print($$b);
>>
>
> print(constant($b));
>
It's definitely different. In your example you have to know that you are
manipulating constants only.
2013/5/28 Amaury Bouchard
> 2013/5/28 Maciek Sokolewicz
>
> > It’s a good idea in general but what about having it for variables as
> >> well? Could open interesting possibilities for an optimizer.
> >>
> >> final $foo = "str";
> >> $foo = "bar"; // bails out
> >>
> >> Don't we already have tha
2013/5/28 Maciek Sokolewicz
> It’s a good idea in general but what about having it for variables as
>> well? Could open interesting possibilities for an optimizer.
>>
>> final $foo = "str";
>> $foo = "bar"; // bails out
>>
>> Don't we already have that? It just has a different name: constants.
On 28-5-2013 10:58, Lars Strojny wrote:
Hi Ferenc,
Am 28.05.2013 um 08:15 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs :
[...]
I would like it to work the same way as it does in java(
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-4.html#jls-4.12.4)
eg. you can set the initial value either in the declaration or
Hi Ferenc,
Am 28.05.2013 um 08:15 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs :
[...]
>> I would like it to work the same way as it does in java(
>> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-4.html#jls-4.12.4)
>> eg. you can set the initial value either in the declaration or later on,
>> but after it is set,
Hi Peter,
> You're describing the current behaviour; unless I'm missing something
> obvious, the warning is only displayed when you try to do something
> date-related. Your example script should not be presenting any warnings,
> regardless of the date.timezone INI setting or lack thereof.
>
>
Pierre Joye wrote:
And I stop here for this discussion, I do not see any new arguments on
both sides and a default TZ will very unlikely happen. Packagers could
deal with that easily and application developers as well.
Isn't the point here that this only became a problem when the NEED for a def
2013.05.28. 8:48, "Peter Cowburn" ezt írta:
>
> On 28 May 2013 07:00, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> sorry for resurrecting the thread, but I think that having a Callable
>> typehint would be nice, and I agree with Etienne that the generic
arguments
>> against typehints doesn't really apply
16 matches
Mail list logo
