They don’t necessarily need to be symbols. Pascal, for example, uses ‘/' for
floating-point division, ‘div' for integer division, ‘mod' for modulus, and
‘rem' for remainder. For example:
20 / 8 = 2.5
20 mod 8 = 4
In PHP, we already have precedence for non-symbol in operators like ‘and',
‘or',
Contributing to the PHP language specification
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi,
Hi!
All right, looks like it is my fault not making the reply sounds
critical enough. It pretty much make all third party php-litespeed rpms
useless, only causes trouble and confusion for LiteSpeed users.
I'm not sure what changed with the last php release - the old code was
there for a l
Hi Ferenc,
is there any reason why seemingly you never read my original mail
about those branches beeing off-limit and those commit gonna be reverted?
http://news.php.net/php.cvs/79411
That's my fault due to how my email filters was configured.
Just a suggestion to make the collaboration better
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Peter Lind wrote:
> On 30 July 2014 19:57, Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> > > On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:51, Adam Harvey wrote:
> > >> -1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough
> > >
> > > % returns the 2nd
On 30 July 2014 19:57, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> > On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:51, Adam Harvey wrote:
> >> -1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough
> >
> > % returns the 2nd part of the integer division, %% returns the 1st.
> Surely that ma
On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:57, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>> On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:51, Adam Harvey wrote:
>>> -1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough
>>
>> % returns the 2nd part of the integer division, %% returns the 1st. Surely
>> that
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:51, Adam Harvey wrote:
>> -1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough
>
> % returns the 2nd part of the integer division, %% returns the 1st. Surely
> that makes sense?
>
That makes sense in PHP. Probably only i
On 30 Jul 2014, at 18:51, Adam Harvey wrote:
> -1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough
% returns the 2nd part of the integer division, %% returns the 1st. Surely that
makes sense?
> I think the utility of
> having it baked into the language as an operator is pretty minimal
> regardle
-1 explanation: I don't think %% is clear enough, the only sensible
syntax choice (//) is unavailable to us, and I think the utility of
having it baked into the language as an operator is pretty minimal
regardless (I coded a lot of Python for scientific research in a
previous job, and I don't think
Am 30.7.2014 um 17:08 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs :
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Matteo Beccati wrote:
>>> Hi Bob,
>>>
>>> On 30/07/2014 14:33, Bob Weinand wrote:
Is this a problem if the interface internally doesn't expect a
>>> para
Good stuff everyone. Glad the vote went through.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Julien Pauli wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
>>
>> On 23 Jul 2014, at 14:38, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>
>> > My sincerest apologies about all the mess earlier and the delay. Both me
>
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Matteo Beccati wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> On 30/07/2014 14:33, Bob Weinand wrote:
>> > Is this a problem if the interface internally doesn't expect a
>> parameter?
>> >
>> > You're free to expect the pa
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> On 30/07/2014 14:33, Bob Weinand wrote:
> > Is this a problem if the interface internally doesn't expect a parameter?
> >
> > You're free to expect the parameter or not, where's the issue?
> > We allow implementations to accept
Hi Bob,
On 30/07/2014 14:33, Bob Weinand wrote:
> Is this a problem if the interface internally doesn't expect a parameter?
>
> You're free to expect the parameter or not, where's the issue?
> We allow implementations to accept more optional parameters than the
> interface specifies, but not les
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Michael Kliewe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> any news on this, any big problems that delay RC3? Or will it be skipped?
> Some info would be nice.
>
> Thanks!
> Michael
>
>
Hi,
RC3 was just tagged, and expected to be released on thursday.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://ty
Hi,
any news on this, any big problems that delay RC3? Or will it be
skipped? Some info would be nice.
Thanks!
Michael
Am 04.07.2014 um 00:52 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs:
Hi,
The second Release Candidate for 5.6.0 was just released and can be
downloaded from:
http://qa.php.net/
The Windows
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote (on 28/07/2014):
- Consistent naming
- Consistent parameter order
- Graceful function/class/interface deprecation
(We know what we should do for these, right?)
I'm not sure if this was meant sincerely, or slightly tongue-in-cheek,
but no, we definitely don't. It comes
Am 28.7.2014 um 15:03 schrieb Matteo Beccati :
> Hi everyone,
>
> On 28/07/2014 09:46, Michael Wallner wrote:
https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug=67064&patch=bug67064-BC&revision=1402667581
>>
>> +1 on Matteo's patch. Rather a single fix than a couple.
>> IIRC, we also have to think a
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Matteo Beccati wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> On 28/07/2014 09:46, Michael Wallner wrote:
> >>>
> https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug=67064&patch=bug67064-BC&revision=1402667581
> >
> > +1 on Matteo's patch. Rather a single fix than a couple.
> > IIRC, we also h
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> On 23 Jul 2014, at 14:38, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>
> > My sincerest apologies about all the mess earlier and the delay. Both me
> and Zeev are happy enough with the RFC, so the voting for this RFC has
> started (again). It shall end on 2014
On 30 Jul 2014, at 07:50, Tjerk Meesters wrote:
>> That would make sense, but doesn't solve all edge cases as your maximum array
>> index is still more than 2 times the largest positive integer on 32-bit.
>
> Is that by design, a bug or something else entirely? Could you explain this
> edge ca
On 20 July 2014 16:44, Peter Cowburn wrote:
> On 21 May 2014 07:24, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:34 PM, David Soria Parra wrote:
>>
>> > Sounds very good and 0.8% overhead is fine. Can we work on getting this
>> > integrated into a v2 of the RFC, continue hopefully construct
On 30/07/14 06:48, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> That would make sense, but doesn't solve all edge cases as your maximum array
> index is still more than 2 times the largest positive integer on 32-bit.
Are we still looking at a situation where how a program performs is
platform specific? An array index o
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Andrey Andreev wrote:
>>
>> This would be a major BC break, that couldn't possibly happen in PHP
>> 5.x and IMO is way too radical even for PHP 6/7.
>
>
> It wouldn't be major BC, but minor
25 matches
Mail list logo
