Matthew,
Yes, all of these problems can be solved - I am well aware of that. I am
also painfully aware of how much time it can take to solve them reliably.
I just would like to see a solution rather than a bunch of work-arounds -
not for my own sake, my problem is solved, but for the sake of ever
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> So I'd go for fixing what is broken and not fixing what isn't :)
Right, I am on it. Snaps page works now except for master. I will
finish that this week.
As of the announcements, yes, we really want to post windows specific
news too, libs
Hi!
> there has been some chatter about windows.php.net, which drives me to
> the question: Do we need that site? Why and for what?
Since windows support in PHP is a bit different from Unix systems -
unlike all other systems, we provide official binaries - I think having
separate domain for it is
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Jakub Zelenka wrote:
> The whole proposal is a bit confusing for me. The combination of PRNG
> algorithm (MT) with libraries (libc, OpenSSL, GMP) that implements one or
> more PRNG algorithms just doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't say anything
> about the speed
Nicolas,
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Nicolas Grekas <
nicolas.grekas+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My previous message didn't push the point I wanted raise: don't we have a
> major problem related to at-run-time namespace resolution for functions and
> constants?
>
> Take this code: namespace foo
Am 01.09.2013 15:12, schrieb Jakub Zelenka:
> The whole proposal is a bit confusing for me. The combination of PRNG
> algorithm (MT) with libraries (libc, OpenSSL, GMP) that implements one or
> more PRNG algorithms just doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't say anything
> about the speed and crypt
I can accept not supporting PSR directly but implementing the class
autoloader and stating "internals believes autoload in should exist, just
doesn't specify/support any particular implementation", this makes sense,
although I like PSR and don't really see others that make (as much) sense.
This me
My previous message didn't push the point I wanted raise: don't we have a
major problem related to at-run-time namespace resolution for functions and
constants?
Take this code: namespace foo { strlen("bar"); }
Will you trigger an autoload for foo\strlen?
I believe not because that would hurt perf
Lester Caine in php.internals (Sun, 01 Sep 2013 14:01:22 +0100):
>Which perhaps why http://www.apachelounge.com/viewforum.php?f=6 has proven
>popular. It would be interesting to know how many download from there rather
>than the 'official' site?
I really would not know. It is a free dropbox-acco
Hi,
I ask this because the OpenSSL option here is the only CSPRNG; The others
> are trivially breakable and should not be used for cryptographic
> applications. I could see an argument for wanting to use them in
> non-security contexts but I'm wondering if the API should make it clear
> when that
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Let be more constructive.
We are discussing to make PHP better, aren't we?
Which perhaps why http://www.apachelounge.com/viewforum.php?f=6 has proven
popular. It would be interesting to know how many download from there rather
than the 'official' site?
http://www.anindya
Hi,
On Sep 1, 2013 11:24 AM, "Florian Anderiasch" wrote:
>
> On 01.09.2013 03:01, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> >> Also I don't consider the separation userfriendly. A user comes to
> >> php.net and tries to fetch downloads ... that might be streamlined
quite
> >> a bit when properly grouped together.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sebastian Krebs [mailto:krebs@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 9:02 PM
> To: Stas Malyshev
> Cc: Sara Golemon; Anthony Ferrara; internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [DRAFT] [RFC] Function autoloading
>
> 2013/8/30 Stas Malyshev
>
> > H
On 01.09.2013 03:01, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> Also I don't consider the separation userfriendly. A user comes to
>> php.net and tries to fetch downloads ... that might be streamlined quite
>> a bit when properly grouped together.
>
> Many can, could, should or would. Complaining and doing almost not
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> All,
>
> There has been a lot of discussion unto the merit of this feature. That's
> fine.
>
> What I'd really like to know before proposing this is what can be improved
> in this RFC.
>
> For example: someone (Stas) brought up that it was w
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Vartolomei Nicolae
wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Sebastian Krebs wrote:
>
> > I already _have_ create files for functions of a namespace... Closed
> source.
> Can we take a look at them as an example? Maybe we can give you some advice
> how to
16 matches
Mail list logo
