Hi,
A quick sketch of an idea that should work:
1, 'parent_id'=>0),
array('id'=>2, 'parent_id'=>1),
array('id'=>3, 'parent_id'=>1),
array('id'=>4, 'parent_id'=>2)
);
// create column data
$keys=$indents=$index=array();
$i=0;
foreach($nodes as $node)
{
$id=$node['id'];
$pid=
On 3/22/07, Sean Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That said, I like the idea of a first class callable object.
For the example above, doing this:
class SortByKey implements Callable {}
Note that this is what Java did since day one (it was thought that
anonymous inner classes were good enough)
On 3/22/07, Christian Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Walter wrote:
> Which seems to fit Andi's $_SCOPE proposal.
Yes, but is a point against a real closure proposal.
I think the defining property of a "real" closure proposal is having
the lexical scope
Hi,
On 3/22/07, Christian Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Walter wrote:
> Right. But then those people add 2 + 2 and get frustrated because they
> can't do the obvious ;)
I find it all but obvious to being able to use non-local, non-global
variables in PHP. It&
Hi,
On 3/21/07, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think solving the common need for 99% of the people with a nice
simple clean anonymous function is PHP way.
Right. But then those people add 2 + 2 and get frustrated because they
can't do the obvious ;)
If somebody has a real-life de
On 1/12/07, Michael B Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:40:32 -0500
Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:57 +, Tim Starling wrote:
> >
> > Limits, table names, and several other query parts are protected by
> > MediaWiki's query builder.
On 9/11/06, Terje Slettebø <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please, people: The availability of free (non-member) functions in PHP (as
in C/C++) is one advantage it has over Java, where everything _has_ to be a
class. So in Java, instead of being able to write "sqrt()", you have
to write "Math::sqrt()"
On 9/11/06, Richard Quadling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One way in useerland to solve this is to use an error handler to
identify non existant function calls and then use an appropriate
mechanism to find them.
You can't catch fatal errors.
Regards,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Devel
Hi,
Is it on purpose that DateTime objects cannot be cloned?
Regards,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
What do you mean?
Regards,
Michael
On 8/10/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Michael,
hwat are you doing there? You turn any new oop feature as oh php 5 into a
joke. What do you aim at?
Thursday, August 10, 2006, 12:02:09 PM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> right now, PHP triggers
What do you feel is incorrect about allowing mentioned errors to be
handled in userspace?
Regards,
Michael
On 8/10/06, Ilia Alshanetsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10-Aug-06, at 6:02 AM, Michael Walter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> right now, PHP triggers fatal errors e.g. when ac
Hi,
On 8/10/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
He wasn't talking about *undefined variables* at all. The variable *is*
defined as private and calling that is ofcourse not allowed.
I was talking about all kinds of errors which for no good reason are
non-recoverable. Surely, the opera
That doesn't justify the error being non-recoverable, though.
Regards,
Michael
On 8/10/06, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pierre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 8/10/06, Michael Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yeah. It is problematic that the appl
l
On 8/10/06, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Walter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> right now, PHP triggers fatal errors e.g. when accessing private
> members or calling nonexistant functions. Since this is problematic
> for obvious reasons, what technical reasons are
Hi,
right now, PHP triggers fatal errors e.g. when accessing private
members or calling nonexistant functions. Since this is problematic
for obvious reasons, what technical reasons are there for that
behavior, and is there a chance that this behaviour will change in a
future release?
Regards,
Mi
Yes definitely, that functionality would be useful.
Regards,
Michael
On 6/3/06, Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On 6/3/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> the attached patch closes one more __toString() part. It allows
> to use objects that define __toString
At least the C++ standard guarantees that all remaining members of the
struct are initialized with their respective default value (which
would is be 0/NULL). So technically speaking, simply using {NULL} is
absolutely fine.
From a cursory glance it appears to me that it is the same with C, but
f
I could be missing the point (only skimmed your mail), but you need to
include your template implementation in every source file that tries
to instantiate the template, e.g. by adding the code to the header
file (the alternative, that is, explicitely instantiating the template
in factory.cpp, would
On 1/12/06, Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 01:25, Jason Garber wrote:
> > Hello Aidan,
> >
> > I think named parameters would be a useful feature... I'll leave it
> > at that.
> >
> > Here is a coding idea for you, in case you hadn't considered it...
> >
>
Surely it ought to care iff trying to look like a processing
instruction. But we digress...
On 12/1/05, Bart de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, that whitespace is meaningfull for XML. Not for PHP. PHP couldn't care
> less how processing instructions are defined in XML.
>
--
PHP Internals -
Of course it is meaningful for PHP as well.
On 12/1/05, Bart de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that whitespace is meaningfull at XML level and not at PHP level.
>
> Processing Instruction: phpecho
>
>
> Sean Coates wrote:
> > Sara Golemon wrote:
> >
> >>> oh, that's easy to solve ' >>>
> >>
On 9/15/05, Leigh Makewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] There are too many viable
> options out there to warrant sticking with the relatively fragile and
> limited PHP platform. "Change to Ruby. It's heaps better!"
FWIW, Ruby is changing as well.
Regards,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Run
Zeev,
On 8/24/05, Michael Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/23/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >"Real" anonymous functions (as in, closures) should be able to capture
> > >variables from its lexical environment, e.g.:
> >
Zeev,
On 8/23/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Real" anonymous functions (as in, closures) should be able to capture
> >variables from its lexical environment, e.g.:
>
> create_function() accepts a string, and that string is constructed with
> full access to the lexical scope of th
On 8/22/05, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MB>>> * Anonymous functions. The real stuff, not just some odd string
> MB>>> passed to create_function().
> MB>>
> MB>>There were some others already asking for this, maybe we should at least
> MB>>give it a thought if it is doable at all
I've as well experienced this problem several times (in a medium-size
code base).
By returning-by-reference in the wrong places, do you mean something like
function foo() { return 10;}
$bar=&foo();
I'm pretty convinced that even with "correct" (in that respect) code
the crash still occurs.
Mi
Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 08:23 PM 8/18/2004 -0400, Sean Coates wrote:
Marcus Boerger wrote:
>>Is this worth further discussion?
>
> Not before until we have an application server and php scripts that are
> designed to run for several months. And even then we would also need
> improved Reflection supp
The latter is much more readable, though.
Cheers,
Michael
Ron Korving wrote:
it's a nice idea, and personally, i would prefer a simple boolean parameter
instead of constants where there's only 2 possibilities anyway..
"Nathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear List,
i
Andi Gutmans wrote:
I'm starting to like goto more and more :)
Good good :)
At least it's a simple concept as opposed to using/scoped which make me
dizzy.
Hehe, I think scoped could be pretty useful, though.
Cheers,
Michael
At 03:24 AM 8/1/2004 +0200, Michael Walter wrote:
Pa
Paul G wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Paul G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operator
--- snip ---
presumably, you see the need
Hiho,
Paul G wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Andi Gutmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GOTO operator
--- snip ---
I'm sorry but I just don't understand the great need for goto in PHP and
th
Bert Slagter wrote:
> Even after reading your message twice, I can't think of an example where
> this would be useful. Obviously, I don't understand your intention.
The original poster wants to add syntax for keyword arguments. Keyword
arguments can be found in quite some languages (Python, Common
Stefan Esser wrote:
The whole discussion about memcpy beeing faster than memmove is
completely pointless. [..]
Agreed.
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Well, surely memmove() needs an additional branch to check for
overlapping, though (the OP was wrong in that memmove() would need a
temporary buffer, though - it doesn't, it usually copies from high
addres to low in the overlapping case).
Cheers,
Michael
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Jun 12, 20
Ilya Sher wrote:
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Ilya Sher wrote:
It looks like using "goto" to me. Messy.
That's probably the reason it is not allowed.
Or maybe other people like myself failed to
understand how it is really useful. Real example
from you would help here.
it's a valid performance trick i
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello internals,
> [...]
How about
function foo(Class? bar)
instead? Too much magic?
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 01:49 AM 4/24/2004 -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Overall I think you would get more bang for the buck by coming up with an
intelligent caching stat/realpath implementation. The obvious drawback
would be that symlinks and other filesystem changes done while the server
is runn
Christian Schneider wrote:
> [...]
I guess someone _that_ considered about performance could easily do a
cat *.php | grep -v require | php -w >app.lib
or the like and include app.lib.
Well yeah, it gets slightly harder when you dynamically require modules.
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Ru
Christian Schneider wrote:
Michael Walter wrote:
How exactly do you think are default parameters related to the issue,
anyway?
Java uses multi-method dispatch to work around missing default values:
function foo($a, $some_flag) { ... }
function foo($a) { foo($a, false); }
instead of
function
Christian Schneider wrote:
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Since we introduce class type hints in PHP 5.0 I think it would be a
good thing [tm] to add multi-method dispatch in PHP 5.1.
Actually I think multi-method dispatching for PHP is A Bad Thing[tm].
Multi-method dispatching is necessary for
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Jakes wrote:
Oh, yes and special methods that you mentioned would come in handy too
but from a object perspective. Maybe explicitly calling some sort
finalize()
method to clean un-referenced objects would also be handy.
finalize() is one of the worst concepts of JAVA
Jakes wrote:
cool, Im going to look more into the engine to see the working.
I suppose PHP it isn't as memory intensive as JAVA
Quick question, does the zend engine have a garbage collector
while we are on the topic?
As said, it uses reference counting.
Cheers,
Michael
"Hartmut Holzgraefe" <[EMA
Jakes wrote:
Oh, yes and special methods that you mentioned would come in handy too
but from a object perspective. Maybe explicitly calling some sort finalize()
method to clean un-referenced objects would also be handy.
How does that differ from $x=null; with a reference-counting garbage
collector
Jakes Potgieter wrote:
It would be nice to have a base class to inherit some special
methods as we do in Java. [...]
What would be useful methods contained in the base class?
Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: "Stephan Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: php.internals
To: "'Jakes'"
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Feb 27, 2004, at 4:12 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Hey,
I'd like to come to some conclusion about the latest changes which
break BC (trying to keep it short because some people here wrote long
essays and it took me too much time to catch up :) :
a) I agree that it does
Ferdinand Beyer wrote:
IMO we are trying to force a strict programming here that is
incompatible with PHP's loose character.
Well, I don't get the point in relation to *constructors* at all.. I
mean, forcing the same signature for each constructor seems unreasonable
to me (_when explicitely cal
Timm Friebe wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/devel/php/tests > cat inheritance.php
class Foo {
function __construct($foo) {
}
}
class Bar extends Foo {
function __construct($foo, $bar) {
// Add = NULL after $bar to make it work
}
}
?>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/devel/php/te
Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 23:49 22/02/2004 +0100, Michael Walter wrote:
No, -2147483648 is the lower bound and 2147483647 is the upper bound for
signed integers.
-2147483648 = 1000
2147483647 = 0111
it still doesn't explain the FPE here.
Sterling Hughes wrote:
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Feb 22, 2004, at 5:15 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's generating an idivl, which gives you an exception if the (signed)
result is too large (a.k.a. integer overflow).
Did you notice your compiler w
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Feb 22, 2004, at 5:15 PM, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's generating an idivl, which gives you an exception if the (signed)
result is too large (a.k.a. integer overflow).
Did you notice your compiler warning "this decimal const
Derick Rethans wrote:
>> [embarassing mistake]
No, -2147483648 is the lower bound and 2147483647 is the upper bound for
signed integers.
Yes of course.
-2147483648 = 1000
2147483647 = 0111
it still doesn't explain the FPE here. What does exp
Ferdinand Beyer wrote:
> [...]
C++ is difficult since it includes C. Nevertheless every C++
programmer is 100% coding (and thinking) object-oriented - even
basic data types like strings are usually objects.
This is rather wrong - one of C++' main strengths is that it allows
multiple paradigms o
Ferdinand Beyer wrote:
> [...]
Well, I must confess that I do not know Perl (perhaps I'm to young).
But I said "not available in any OO language" - neither Perl nor PHP
are OO languages in my opinion (like Java, C++) so we should not
use Perl as a role model here :-)
What is your criterium of a
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 00:58 07/02/2004, Christian Jerono wrote:
Well so wouldn't 'reverse construction order' mean:
$container=...;
$obj = $container->getFoo();
results in call of $obj->__destruct(); and then $container->__destruct();
maybe i just missed the problem here?
Yes, and yes you did :
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 13:01 06/02/2004, Stephane Drouard wrote:
== Quote from Red Wingate ([EMAIL PROTECTED])'s article
> Is the removal of a specific order on the __destruct() calls
> necessary? It's a pain in the ass the be unable to predict
> in which order the __destruct() calls are made.
I d
Stephane Drouard wrote:
== Quote from Red Wingate ([EMAIL PROTECTED])'s article
Is the removal of a specific order on the __destruct() calls
necessary? It's a pain in the ass the be unable to predict
in which order the __destruct() calls are made.
[..]
Couldn't PHP implement global object destruct
Hi Andi,
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> [...]
>
> This has several implications:
>
> [...]
>
> 2. A *VERY* important implication is that you cannot, and must not
rely in any way on the order of destruction during shutdown. It runs in
no particular order. That means that by the time the destructor for
Do you have circular references between 2+ objects? The __destruct()
method won't be called then for those, I suppose.
Cheers,
Michael
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
The __destruct() method of the PHPUnit_Extensions_Logger_XML class
(part of PHPUnit) is not beeing called.
To reproduce:
1.)
It seems to me the certain amounts of case insensitivity which are still
part of PHP start making less and less sense.
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Daniel Convissor wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 08:49:10PM +0100, Andrey Hristov wrote:
So the code with @ is "working". The set_error_handler() is bailing out
and everything is ok
No, the erorr handler isn't being called and that's not okay.
--Dan
Well, you could simply do like
set_error_ha
Felipe Lopes wrote:
Hi there!
What you guys think about make array_reverse() a variable referenced
function. I mean something like:
function new_array_reverse(&$array){
$array = array_reverse($array);
}
-1 from me (supposed my vote counts ;), as this works pretty much
against functional
Cesare D'Amico wrote:
Alle 16:09, sabato 13 dicembre 2003, Sebastian Bergmann ha scritto:
- Does
interface C implements A, B {}
do what I want?
This syntax sounds strange to me: an interface should'nt _implement_
other interfaces... sounds as nonsense.
That might be part of his
with a slight advantage to StudlyCaps) I think it's the right way to go
[..] or we'll never get any closure. [..]
You got closures for me? Lexical ones? Whee ;)
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
On Wednesday 03 December 2003 23:35, Michael Walter wrote:
Markus Fischer wrote:
> [...]
I like the initial argument brought up by Mr. Wendel, namely to
easily differentiate between PHP method calls and userland written
method calls.
- Markus (
Andi Gutmans wrote:
At 11:35 PM 12/3/2003 +0100, Michael Walter wrote:
Markus Fischer wrote:
> [...]
I like the initial argument brought up by Mr. Wendel, namely to
easily differentiate between PHP method calls and userland
written
method calls.
- Markus (and
Markus Fischer wrote:
> [...]
I like the initial argument brought up by Mr. Wendel, namely to
easily differentiate between PHP method calls and userland written
method calls.
- Markus (and his cow)
How is this an advantage?
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime De
Sascha Schumann wrote:
-1 on embracing studlyCaps in the context of PHP itself.
(Note: studlyCaps originated with a OO language, namely
Smalltalk, but it is not pervasive in OO land. If you don't
believe me, just look at the STL. You won't find any
uglyCaps over there.)
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On the other hand, there are Common Lisp (foo-bar-baz), Python (mostly
foobarbaz) and Ruby (mostly foo_bar_baz).
To be pedantic, the Python style guide
(http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0008.html) specifies class names to be
StudlyCaps and method names to be either und
George Schlossnagle wrote:
My vote is on StudlyCaps for class method and attribute names. This is
the standard in many OO languages (SmallTalk, C#, Java - as a
parenthetical I don't think that SmallTalks adoption of StudlyCaps (one
of the first I'm aware of) had anything to do with _ rendering)
Christian Schneider wrote:
>[...]
c) $arr[$obj] would suddenly work according the __toString().
I remember this being requested as a feature anyway ;-)
The feature request was about using objects as hash indices, not their
string representation (IIRC).
Cheers,
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Ru
Well, I can live with any of those names :) Didn't realize either, that
it would be that much of a deal to rename an interface ;) I wasn't
talking about is_a(), though, but of the general concept of using
inheritance for modelling "is a" relationships, hence the name
recommendation. Although, a
(Gotta admit though, that it goes okay with "implements". Not sure
whether I still have a point, though, as still dealing with inheritance)
And how about calling it Indexable, or something that can be used in a
"is a" sentence? As in, you could say "MyArray is an Indexable", but
"MyArray is an
And how about calling it Indexable, or something that can be used in a
"is a" sentence? As in, you could say "MyArray is an Indexable", but
"MyArray is an ArrayAccess" sounds just wrong ;)
Cheers,
Michael
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
Monday, November 24, 2003, 10:37:50 PM, you wrote:
Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Michael Walter wrote:
Spotting a missing function is quite easy, your script simply
won't work and give a clear error.. :)
Well, not exactly :) It might just not work anymore at some time in the
future (as you know you never really have 100%
So, when upgrading, you just go through the new entries, and grep your
source files for occurences - no big deal.
Where's the missing point? ;)
No one reads the NEWS file.
And everone will get the default answer "read the NEWS" once he
complains :) Or you might even add a notice _in the error
Spotting a missing function is quite easy, your script simply
won't work and give a clear error.. :)
Well, not exactly :) It might just not work anymore at some time in the
future (as you know you never really have 100% code coverage, even with
unit testing and stuff. it's way less than 1
you're dealing
with objects.
Cheers,
Michael
Walter A. Boring IV wrote:
Howdy,
I'm playing with php5 (from cvs), and came accross a strange error
that doesn't happen with php4. Maybe someone can shed some light on
this for me?
I get the error
"Fatal error: Only variable
Maybe something like that could help you:
#define HAS_INT64_PRIMITIVE
#ifdef MSVC
#define int64_t __int64
#elif ...
#else
typedef struct int64_t_ { int32_t a, b; } int64_t;
#undef HAS_INT64_PRIMITIVE
#endif
- Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: h
Marco Tabini wrote:
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Nov 5, 2003, at 1:29 PM, Marco Tabini wrote:
$a = [1,2,$b[11]] is semantically inconsistent.
How so? Is
I think I've already explained why.
Not really understandable, though.
foo(array(1,2));
semantically inconsistent? On one hand () is us
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree
$a = [1,2,$b[11]] is semantically inconsistent.
Yeah, I agree to disagree on that one, too :)
Actually, do you realize that you use () both for "grouping" and for
application? I can't see anything wrong with using square brackets for
array element access
I like some of the Python syntax. But some of it is cumbersome. Same
with PHP. But I think PHP is closer to what I want so what's wrong with
trying to improve it where it's possible (and easily done)?
agree, and you can easily make PHP code not readable with such improvements.
again, I can't un
$a = [1,2,$b[11]];
Is that confusing enough for you? ;-)
What's confusing about it?
The fact that $b[11] references an item of an array, while [1,2,$b[11]]
assigns values to the array $a. The fact that you (and, probably, most
of us) can't tell right off the bat is a clear sign that this is a
Very cool.
How about supporting .. syntax, btw. as in [1..3] or ["a".."z"]? Might
no be the worth, just thinking out loud ;)
"might not be worth it"..
Christian Schneider wrote:
I propose to add an alternative (backward compatible) short array
creation syntax:
$a = [ 1, 2, 3 ]; and $a = [ 'a' =
Very cool.
How about supporting .. syntax, btw. as in [1..3] or ["a".."z"]? Might
no be the worth, just thinking out loud ;)
Christian Schneider wrote:
I propose to add an alternative (backward compatible) short array
creation syntax:
$a = [ 1, 2, 3 ]; and $a = [ 'a' => 42, 'b' => "foo" ];
It
For the ptrdiff_t error, you could just #include .
Concerning ssize_t - that isn't a type defined anywhere in the C
standard libary, so you have to typedef it by yourself. Alternatively,
you could include and typedef SSIZE_T ssize_t;
Steph wrote:
btw if you replace ssize_t nbytes = 0; with in
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Named parameters are commonly implemented using an associated array in
PHP:
foo(
array(
'foo' => 'bar',
'bar' => 'foo'
)
);
?>
So, how do you think that isn't known to the original poster as he even
explicitely states that
86 matches
Mail list logo
