Hi Anatol,
I know, TSRM uses TLS APIs internally.
In my opinion, the simplest (and probably efficient) way to get rid of
TSRMLS_DC arguments and TSRMLS_FETCH calls, would be introducing a global
thread specific variable.
__thread void ***tsrm_ls;
As I understood it won't work on Windows anyway,
On 24/09/2014 20:13, Nikita Popov wrote:
The vote for removal of alternative PHP opening/closing tags in PHP 7 is
now open:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/remove_alternative_php_tags#vote
Hi!
We've talked about this RFC with several other members of AFUP (French
UG), and we pretty much all ag
Hi Dmtry,
thanks for taking a look at this.
On Wed, October 1, 2014 00:09, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I took a quick look over the patch.
> I didn't get why it's named "native_tls" now, because it doesn't use
> "__thread" variables anymore.
I was wondering myself but now I see (intentionall
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> Currently our git repo contains files like zend_language_scanner.c,
> zend_ini_scanner.c, etc which are files generated by re2c. Historically
> these files have been included because re2c was not readily available on
> many
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Leigh wrote:
> On 30 September 2014 23:05, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>>
>> And anyone with a wiki account can vote too, meaning everyone who
>> wrote an RFC can in theory vote on anything, take for example fabpot,
>> who does not have an VCS account but can vote
On 30 September 2014 23:05, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>
> And anyone with a wiki account can vote too, meaning everyone who
> wrote an RFC can in theory vote on anything, take for example fabpot,
> who does not have an VCS account but can vote still because he have a
> wiki account, which is out
Hi,
I took a quick look over the patch.
I didn't get why it's named "native_tls" now, because it doesn't use
"__thread" variables anymore.
Actually, now the patch get rid of additional TSRMLS_ arguments, but
performs near the same thing as TSRMLS_FETCH() on each module global
access. It leads to h
2014-09-30 21:59 GMT+02:00 Andrey Andreev :
> Well, let's see ... what is the current status quo?
>
> Currently, all voters have VCS accounts, meaning that they already are
> at least one of:
>
> a) C code contributors
> b) documentation contributors
> c) contributing to the php.net website or some
On 30 September 2014 20:31, Sharon Levy wrote:
>
> If more users were educated about PHP's internals, then there could be more
> substantive discussions between Userland and core contributors, including
> better ideas originating from Userland. More users might even consider
> becoming core con
> What does that even mean?
It means that any new functionality that gets into core could be considered
"young". Like when PHAR got introduced, it was a "young" extension. Same
for PDO, same for FileInfo...
What I'm trying to highlight is that being a recently coded extension or
not, it's not a go
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Andrey Andreev wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Sharon Levy
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: Andrey Andreev
> > Sent: Sep 29, 2014 3:01 PM
> > To: Sharon Levy
> > Cc: Zeev Suraski , Derick Rethans ,
> Andrea
> > Faulds , PHP internals
> > Subject: Re: [PH
On 30 Sep 2014, at 20:56, guilhermebla...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Isn't this extension a bit "young" to join php core ?
>
> I agree. However, there's no equivalent existing support in PHP atm.
That, in itself, is not necessarily a justification. Unless an awful lot of PHP
users need this, it shoul
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Sharon Levy wrote:
>
>
> From: Andrey Andreev
> Sent: Sep 29, 2014 3:01 PM
> To: Sharon Levy
> Cc: Zeev Suraski , Derick Rethans , Andrea
> Faulds , PHP internals
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is it fair that people with no karma can vote on
> RFCs?
>
> On Tue, Sep
> Fix the title? :) Is it for sync or pecl_http?
Someone already fixed that.
> Isn't this extension a bit "young" to join php core ?
I agree. However, there's no equivalent existing support in PHP atm.
Also, any new functionality introduced to PHP would always be new, young
and caring maturity.
From: Andrey Andreev
Sent: Sep 29, 2014 3:01 PM
To: Sharon Levy
Cc: Zeev Suraski , Derick Rethans , Andrea
Faulds , PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Is it fair that people with no karma can vote on RFCs?
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Sharon Levy wrote:
> >> I think in all fairness,
This needs a "Why" section.
Why is this good for PHP?
Why will a significant percentage of users be interested in this?
Why is it necessary?
This feel pretty niche to me.
-Sara
> On Sep 30, 2014, at 4:06, "guilhermebla...@gmail.com"
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is a new RFC: https://wiki.php.n
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I wonder if one could replace that release server with a simple vagrant
>> setup or similar so the RM can actually create release archives on his
>> own.
>
> I've always packaged 5.4 on my local machine, but it may have a downside
>
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014, Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 30/09/2014 05:06, guilhermebla...@gmail.com a écrit :
> >
> > Here is a new RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/sync
>
> Isn't this extension a bit "young" to join php core ?
I'd say both that, and that the RFC is *very* minimal. THere is no
rationale why
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Leigh wrote:
> On 30 September 2014 04:06, guilhermebla...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is a new RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/sync
>>
>> Thoughts appreciated.
>>
>
> What are the actual benefits of this being included in core? The RFC
> doesn't really lis
19 matches
Mail list logo
