On 8 July 2014 08:42, Anatol Belski wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> On Fri, June 13, 2014 16:20, Julien Pauli wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > I just wrote a patch to add fallocate() syscall support for streams.
> > It relies on posix_fallocate(), so that it should support many Unixes.
> > Linux's got a specif
Hi Julien,
On Fri, June 13, 2014 16:20, Julien Pauli wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I just wrote a patch to add fallocate() syscall support for streams.
> It relies on posix_fallocate(), so that it should support many Unixes.
> Linux's got a specification with a fallocate() function, more powerful
> than the
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Michael Wallner wrote:
>> About the need of a flag for the tests, it would be useful as well.
>> Many tests can't be in run in parallel, like many mysql tests (or
>> other databases f.e.).
>
>
> Why can't those tests use unique (to them) names?
mysql f.e. initiali
On 7 July 2014 19:13, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Laruence wrote:
> > Hey:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time,
> which
> >> adds concurrent test execution
On 7 July 2014 17:17, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time,
>> which adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
>> re-entrant tests in the
On 7 July 2014 17:07, Laruence wrote:
> Hey:
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time,
> which
> > adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> > re-entrant tests in t
Hi!
> Commit:7c2489751cc48961487edd69b49083d4ca6b4828
> Author:Sara Golemon Mon, 7 Jul 2014 12:19:11
> -0700
> Parents: 888fb3323ed1bb728064f27a6127d194eb92f9ee
> Branches: master
>
> Link:
> http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=commitdiff;h=7c2489751cc48961487edd69b490
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Laruence wrote:
> Hey:
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
>> adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
>> re-entrant tests in
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
> adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
>
HHVM uses PHP's
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> On 7 ביול 2014, at 08:50, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>
>>
>> The problem is that people who want to add stuff for PHP 6 feel they have to
>> add it to phpng, because if phpng is to be PHP 6, then it would need to be
>> based off that branch.
>>
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time,
> which adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
>
> Test
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> I've started the vote on the Uniform Variable Syntax RFC:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax#vote
>
> You can review the discussion about this RFC here:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/mr4ihbubfbdxyg
On 07/07/2014 16:54, Laruence wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 15:42, Laruence wrote:
1. "The current patch introduces a new “write context” issue. Namely
($foo)['bar'] = 'baz' will not behave this same was as $foo['bar'] =
'baz'. In the former c
Hey:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
> adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
>
>
Hey:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2014, at 15:42, Laruence wrote:
>
>> 1. "The current patch introduces a new “write context” issue. Namely
>> ($foo)['bar'] = 'baz' will not behave this same was as $foo['bar'] =
>> 'baz'. In the former case an undefined vari
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2014, at 15:42, Laruence wrote:
>
>> 1. "The current patch introduces a new “write context” issue. Namely
>> ($foo)['bar'] = 'baz' will not behave this same was as $foo['bar'] =
>> 'baz'. In the former case an undefined variable n
On 7 Jul 2014, at 15:42, Laruence wrote:
> 1. "The current patch introduces a new “write context” issue. Namely
> ($foo)['bar'] = 'baz' will not behave this same was as $foo['bar'] =
> 'baz'. In the former case an undefined variable notice will be thrown
> if $foo does not exist, whereas the lat
Hey:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> I've started the vote on the Uniform Variable Syntax RFC:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax#vote
>
> You can review the discussion about this RFC here:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/mr4ihbu
On 7 Jul 2014, at 15:36, Michael Wallner wrote:
> Hm... didn't think of that, seems overly complex. What would actually need
> the singularity of the universe? :)
I don’t think it’d be difficult. It wouldn’t mean you can’t run tests alongside
it, just that you can’t run it concurrently with a
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
> adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
>
> Tests
Hi Andrea!
On 7 July 2014 15:56, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2014, at 14:53, Michael Wallner wrote:
> > I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time,
> which adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but t
Hi internals!
I've started the vote on the Uniform Variable Syntax RFC:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/uniform_variable_syntax#vote
You can review the discussion about this RFC here:
http://markmail.org/message/mr4ihbubfbdxygci
The vote requires a 2/3 majority and is planned to end on 2014-0
On 7 Jul 2014, at 14:53, Michael Wallner wrote:
> I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
> adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
> re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
Did you, or will you
Hi!
I also have a patch for run-tests sitting around for quite some time, which
adds concurrent test execution support. I already fixed a lot of non
re-entrant tests in the past, but there might still be quite some of them.
Tests in ./Zend take 8 seconds instead of 30 on my box.
Please find the
On 7 Jul 2014, at 14:13, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> On 7 ביול 2014, at 08:59, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 7 Jul 2014, at 13:57, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think it's a problem, because I don't think we're two years
>>> away from releasing a phpng-based version and I don't think i
> On 7 ביול 2014, at 08:59, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
>
>> On 7 Jul 2014, at 13:57, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it's a problem, because I don't think we're two years
>> away from releasing a phpng-based version and I don't think it's a
>> moving target at this point. So I agree we need
And here we go. So basically you are saying that once phpng is stabilized,
no matter the api/SRC cleanness, we are good for next. This is very bad and
I will vote -1 on anything close to this idea.
Besides that, the same kind of estimation was done for opcache, which was a
much smaller beast. They
On 7 Jul 2014, at 13:57, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I don't think it's a problem, because I don't think we're two years
> away from releasing a phpng-based version and I don't think it's a
> moving target at this point. So I agree we need to remove these
> uncertainties.
>
> I'm going to start an R
> On 7 ביול 2014, at 08:50, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
>
> The problem is that people who want to add stuff for PHP 6 feel they have to
> add it to phpng, because if phpng is to be PHP 6, then it would need to be
> based off that branch.
>
I don't think it's a problem, because I don't think we're t
On 7 Jul 2014, at 13:19, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I am skeptical on bigint in the engine given what is possible now in
> gmp. But yes, phpng is also a problem as it creates a total new code
> base and barely blocks any other improvements. Why? Except that bigint
> thing, I do not see many people try
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2014, at 13:19, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>> I am skeptical on bigint in the engine given what is possible now in
>> gmp. But yes, phpng is also a problem as it creates a total new code
>> base and barely blocks any other improvements.
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 07/07/14 12:31, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> I seriously hope that you take 2015 as pure example here. As I see no
>> remote chance to be ready next year. PHPNG is a huge stack of
>> undocumented perf patches far from being ready, APIs &code cleanu
On 07/07/14 12:31, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I seriously hope that you take 2015 as pure example here. As I see no
> remote chance to be ready next year. PHPNG is a huge stack of
> undocumented perf patches far from being ready, APIs &code cleanup did
> not even begin, and the existing APIs are even mor
On 7 Jul 2014, at 12:31, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I seriously hope that you take 2015 as pure example here. As I see no
> remote chance to be ready next year. PHPNG is a huge stack of
> undocumented perf patches far from being ready, APIs &code cleanup did
> not even begin, and the existing APIs are
hi,
On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> While I'm not sure whether this isn't a bit premature to have this
> discussion, if we were to have this discussion, the RFC should do a much
> better job at summarizing the discussions we already had in the past.
I think it is not prem
35 matches
Mail list logo
