Results for project PHP master, build date 2017-03-27 20:29:46-07:00
commit: bf673d3
previous commit:56269af
revision date: 2017-03-27 19:45:03+02:00
environment:Haswell-EP
cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores,
stepping 2, LLC 45 MB
Hi internals!
There doesn't appear to be a status quo on what to do with bug reports targeting
PECL extensions that seem completely unmaintained (i.e. no releases in many
years -
such as bug reports for the SAM extension[1][2]). Would anyone have any
objections
if I closed such reports with
Thanks; NEWS entry is missing though!
And it unfortunately *just* missed the 7.0.18 branch cutoff :(
Or can it be merged to PHP-7.0.18, given how problems would be caught in
7.1.4RC1 testing? ;)
> On 28. Mar 2017, at 22:10, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:58 PM, David Zue
Hi!
> I wanted first to know if php source code can welcome oses specific
> features or should it remain as separated php modules ?
If it's an extension, there's nothing wrong with OS-specific ones -
though it would be in a good taste to clearly mark it as such in the
documentation.
The code tha
> -Original Message-
> From: Christoph M. Becker [mailto:cmbecke...@gmx.de]
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 2:10 PM
> To: Anatol Belski ; 'Michael Wallner'
> ;
> rquadl...@gmail.com; 'PHP internals'
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Looking for Z_TYPE_PP in all the wrong places.
>
> On 14.12.
No problem. I instead thank you for checking this, because I forgot to
check it myself (sorry).
Hey Folks,
Sorry, my mistake on detecting the BC break. I had a misconception about
how `ReflectionMethod#getDeclaringClass()` works. I thought that the
declaring class was the declaring abstraction, but it's actually always
pointing to the most concrete implementation in the inheritance.
See htt
On 3/28/2017 6:50 AM, Wes wrote:
> Hello PHPeeps,
>
> There hasn't been much discussion around the proposed feature, and I've
> interpreted it as a good sign :P It is not a super important change but it
> has some advantages, it's consistent with the recent improvements to type
> variance and also
Hi Derick, sorry, previous message was meant to reply to you. There is no
BC break, not even subtle.
Ocramius' assumption is wrong. The most authoritative one is the innermost
and closest ancestor definition. It is like that for classes, it is like
that for interfaces, should be like that for abst
> Am 28.03.2017 um 06:58 schrieb Marco Pivetta :
>
> Voted "no" because of this paragraph:
>
>> This RFC proposes to allow this, even if it has very few uses, and
> because there is no reason to disallow a compatible redefinition.
>
> I couldn't see a use-case.
>
> In addition to that, this br
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Joe Watkins wrote:
> With the first alpha of 7.2 due in early June, we think it's time to start
> the process of finding and electing release managers for the next minor
> release of PHP.
>
> We are looking for two souls to take on this role. Whomsoever is elected
Hi again. There is no BC break, at all.
Evening all,
With the first alpha of 7.2 due in early June, we think it's time to start
the process of finding and electing release managers for the next minor
release of PHP.
We are looking for two souls to take on this role. Whomsoever is elected
will be guided and helped by Davey and I, until
Le 24/03/2017 à 20:31, Jakub Zelenka a écrit :
> After thinking about it and considering that distros patching the 7.0
> openssl ext just for the OpenSSL 1.1 support, I started working on the
> complete patch for 7.0 only. I wanted to initially start with the above one
> but after I get it from Re
Hey Wes,
On 28 Mar 2017 02:14, "Wes" wrote:
Yes, yes you are :D Quick reminder:
```php
interface iA { function bar(stdClass $x); }
interface iB extends iA { function bar($x): stdClass; } // OK
class cA { function bar(stdClass $x) {} }
class cB extends
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Marco Pivetta wrote:
> Voted "no" because of this paragraph:
>
> > This RFC proposes to allow this, even if it has very few uses, and
> > because there is no reason to disallow a compatible redefinition.
>
> I couldn't see a use-case.
>
> In addition to that, this breaks t
16 matches
Mail list logo
