Hello,
The PHP documentation has a separate place for detailed examples.
For example:
http://php.net/manual/en/book.inclued.php
http://php.net/manual/en/inclued.examples-implementation.php
The same could be done for ext/hash which today lacks an Examples
section:
http://php.net/manual/e
On Mar 7, 2013, at 1:58 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> Philip,
>
> Shouldn't we be focusing on how this makes PHP better? And not nitpick
>> about a percentage point or two?
>>
>
> Well, this passed with 62.8%. Property accessors failed with 60.7%. The
> target for acceptance is 66.6%. So 3.8%
On Mar 7, 2013, at 1:00 PM, David Soria Parra wrote:
> On 2013-03-07, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> On 03/07/2013 09:01 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
>>
>>> So my proposal is to slow down for a minute and not call this RFC
>>> accepted or not until we can come to some consensus as to if it
>>> classif
On Nov 28, 2012, at 2:08 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Alexey Zakhlestin
> wrote:
>> I voted "no", "(b)"
>> We should mention deprecation in manual as hard as possible, we should
>> mention it in ext/mysql/config.m4 and any other place we can reach.
>> Then
On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:34 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> The issue I have with this is just that we don't seem to be making
>> much of an effort to stick to the promises we've made around BC when
>
> We make a lot of effort to do this. But it does not mean we should be
> blindly and stupid
Thanks everyone, I didn't remember thinking about this so was
impulsively curious. Dug a little now, so here's what happened:
Proposal to internals (July 14, 2012) with discussion July 14-18:
--
Thread: http://markmail.org/thread/kewdoz3dowrr7rfv
Summary:Seemed
On Nov 16, 2012, at 12:55 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 11/16/2012 12:51 AM, Patrick ALLAERT wrote:
>> Rasmus,
>>
>> As per the RFC: adding E_DEPRECATED only in mysql_connect(),
>> mysql_pconnect(). Which means only one error (normally) by request.
>
> I still don't see the point of using E_DE
Hello geeks,
Why does PHP 5.5 remove the *_logo_* functions? Is this a security
related move? Shouldn't these emit E_DEPRECATED errors in 5.5?
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> The main argument is that we haven't actually made it clear in the
> manual that the extension is going to be deprecated. There is a user
> note on http://www.php.net/manual/en/book.mysql.php and a "This
> extension is not recommended for writing new code" on
> http://www.php.net/manual/en/intro
On Nov 5, 2012, at 8:55 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 11/05/2012 08:41 AM, Jean-Sébastien Hedde wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 08:04:06 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the documentation is wrong on that. In Unicode mode [[:alnum:]]
>>> actually becomes \p{Xan} which should match
On Sep 17, 2012, at 8:30 AM, jpauli wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Hannes Magnusson
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:59 AM, jpauli wrote:
I'm confused.. --enable-all is already supported, just like --disable-all ?
-Hannes
>>>
>>> AFAIR no :) We have a --di
On Aug 1, 2012, at 7:01 AM, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 13:38 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
>> The default if it's not included in the .ini is ON, but the
>> sample .ini's both switch it off, and that is what the distributions
>> follow when creating a clean install.
>>
>> ALL
On Apr 24, 2012, at 4:46 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> The less people beginning to rely on this bug the better, and this is
>> a critical time. The impact of this BC break feels larger considering
>> MQ is enabled by default in PHP 5.3 and below.
>
> I understand but a) nobody should be
On Apr 24, 2012, at 9:43 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> https://bugs.php.net/61784
>>
>> The get_magic_quotes_gpc() function returns 0/1 before 5.4, but now
>> it returns boolean false. Instead it should return 0. Fixing this
>> feels like a bug fix, which would go in 5.4.1. Thoughts?
>
Hello everyone,
The following bug report brings up a good point:
https://bugs.php.net/61784
The get_magic_quotes_gpc() function returns 0/1 before 5.4, but now
it returns boolean false. Instead it should return 0. Fixing this
feels like a bug fix, which would go in 5.4.1. Thoughts?
Regards,
On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:34 AM, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
> On 04/10/2012 06:20 PM, Adir Kuhn wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> today I read this post, I think that some points are valid, follow the link
>> for
>> you guys
>
> as stuff like this comes up again and again (although not in as epic
> lenght
On Apr 17, 2012, at 4:08 PM, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
>
> On 04/17/2012 03:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> sorry, I can't really follow you with that.
>>> do you have a problem allowing the non-vcs users (defined by the voting
>>> rfc) to vote, or do you have a problem providing a
On Apr 16, 2012, at 6:21 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Kris Craig wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>
>>>
Just to play devil's advocate (Satan and I go way back), what about
people who are established PHP develo
On Apr 5, 2012, at 8:22 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 07:55 PM, Sébatien Durand wrote:
>> IMHO, PHP is a great template language. This is what makes it so simple
>> and powerful, compared to other web languages.
>>
>> So far, we have ">
>> A suggestion : deprecate these old tags an
On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Can we please fix the GIT commit mails before we move anything else
> over?
+1
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Mar 1, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Adam Harvey wrote:
> On 2 March 2012 09:56, Philip Olson wrote:
>> Please clarify whether or not get_magic_quotes_gpc() and
>> get_magic_quotes_runtime()
>> are deprecated, because I do not think they are. Deprecated means people
>> s
Hello!
Please clarify whether or not get_magic_quotes_gpc() and
get_magic_quotes_runtime()
are deprecated, because I do not think they are. Deprecated means people should
not
use them while writing new code, but they are perfectly sensible functions.
I propose that we do not describe get_magic
The mirrors have not yet updated, which is why the announcement
linked specifically to docs.php.net (which builds the docs
4x daily[1]) for several entries.
So while not perfect… the mirrors will update tomorrow, and
will include additional information. Also, a few people are
making migration54 c
On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Ángel González wrote:
> On 02/03/12 01:00, Simon Schick wrote:
>> Hi, all
>>
>> When will the documentation be ready?
>>
>> For example you wrote that something has changed to the keywords *continue
>> *and
>> *break *- but I dont get what and it's not defined in he
Hi Richard,
I'm a little confused. Showing E_NOTICE errors is already the default
with both php.ini-* files. What does this RFC change? Are you proposing
that the PHP default value (without a php.ini) be modified?
; error_reporting
; Default Value: E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE & ~E_STRICT & ~E_DEPRECATE
On Jan 10, 2012, at 11:54 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 01/10/2012 11:33 AM, Philip Olson wrote:
>> Any objections? Regardless of deprecation status, this option
>> should be available. Or if not, why?
>
> The main reason is that we are not done removing all the dependenci
Hi!
This thread has veered off-course. So to summarize:
(1) ereg is deprecated, and usage is discouraged
(2) It emits E_DEPRECATED errors as of PHP 5.3
(3) We cannot disable/remove ereg at compile time (today)
I'm suggesting we alter (3) so that we, the people who compile
PHP, can optional
t; On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Philip Olson wrote:
>> Hi geeks!
>>
>> We're unable to disable the ereg extension today, yet it's been deprecated
>> since PHP 5.3.0. Is this by design?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Philip
>>
>>
>> --
&
Hi geeks!
We're unable to disable the ereg extension today, yet it's been deprecated
since PHP 5.3.0. Is this by design?
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Jan 5, 2012, at 6:56 AM, Tom Worster wrote:
> On 12/29/11 2:03 PM, "Philip Olson" wrote:
>
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> I fully support a one-method-to-rule-them-all for generating random
>> sauce. Long ago I created an incomplete RFC on the subject, but please
> As a noob here, what should I do next in order to pursue my objective? Is
> this what the PHP RFC is for?
Hi Tom,
I fully support a one-method-to-rule-them-all for generating random sauce. Long
ago I created an incomplete RFC on the subject, but please feel free to ignore
and create a new/b
On Nov 23, 2011, at 11:45 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> You mean hosting our own, or using some third party service?
>> Usually I prefer http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/
>> Unfortunately not all of our lists are mirrored there.
>
> Well, yes, I know there are various p
On Nov 16, 2011, at 5:34 AM, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 13:35 +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Felipe Pena wrote:
>>
>>> 2011/11/16 Ferenc Kovacs :
Hi.
We moved the sqlite ext from core to pecl with 5.4, but the
http://p
On Oct 6, 2011, at 3:24 PM, David Zülke wrote:
> FYI: http://blog.joda.org/2011/10/today-time-zone-database-was-closed.html
>
> This could impact PHP as well since it bundles the database.
>
> David
>
> P.S. I hope Google/IBM/Oracle/whoever just buys those guys and then fires
> everyone.
I s
I'm not familiar enough with Mercurial to properly vote, but am
guessing we'll move to Git. Git is popular because Github is
popular, and Github is popular because it's awesome.
But I think we should skip git.php.net and mirrors/bridges, and
simply move to Github. And this means people who mai
On Jul 25, 2011, at 1:57 PM, JJ wrote:
> While looking over the release notes for 5.4a1
> (http://www.php.net/archive/2011.php#id2011-06-28-1) I noticed that
> the related session_* functions had been removed.
>
> As I interpreted it, this goes against the spirit of the release RFC
> for x.y+1.z
On Jul 22, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Alex Howansky wrote:
>
>> Just curious, if the trait property is set to private what happens?
>
> Ooh, good question.
>
> PHP Fatal error: baz and foo define the same property ($zoo) in the
> composition of baz. However, the definition differs and is considered
On Jul 18, 2011, at 7:39 AM, Daniel Convissor wrote:
> Hi Folks:
>
> We all want to see Magic Quotes go away. Discussions on this list indicate
> several people are concerned with doing this in a safe and orderly
> manner. [1][2] To this end, I have posted an RFC at
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/
On Jul 17, 2011, at 2:33 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Stas Malyshev
> wrote:
>> Here are the results of the votes. I've split them into "PHP Group" - people
>> that have write access to the PHP code, based on SVN karma algorithm, and
>> "Community" - all the rest.
On Jul 17, 2011, at 5:56 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 7/17/11 5:46 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>>> And you rely on magic_quotes being on, right? Then you have peculiar
>>> definition of "working perfectly".
>>
>> Nobody here said they rely
On Jul 17, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 7/17/11 3:03 PM, Richard Quadling wrote:
>> Why bother having defaults if you don't use them.
>
> Err, well, the way PHP ini system works you always have defaults - something
> is always stored in the hash.
His point was that you
Hola friends,
Nice feedback so far, and the PHP documentation will begin implementing
the ideas presented here, and focus on mysqli but also recommend pdo_mysql.
Therefore, the ext/mysql documentation will be improved to strongly
recommend the preferred alternatives that have existed since PHP
On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:35 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 20:02, David Soria Parra wrote:
>> On 2011-07-12, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> As of now I do not think we should allow this change, whether the RFC
>>> is accepted or not does not matter as it will badly brea
On Jul 11, 2011, at 5:20 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 7/11/11 5:09 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>> this previously accepted RFC is not about removing magic quotes. And I'm the
>> author of said RFC. It deals with PHP 5.3 which removed get_magic_quotes_*()
>&g
On Jul 8, 2011, at 11:30 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've created a voting page for the features in 5.4 TODO list for which we
> need to find consensus. Please go there:
> https://wiki.php.net/todo/php54/vote
> and vote!
>
> See also links to relevant RFCs on the TODO page:
> https://w
On Jul 11, 2011, at 3:48 PM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 00:34, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 7/11/11 3:20 PM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>>>
>>> The idea Stas proposed of leaving the votes untouched and just hide
>>> those specific votes during rendering of the vote
On Jul 11, 2011, at 8:11 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Hannes Magnusson
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:48, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
wrote:
Greetings PHP geeks,
Don't panic! This is not a proposal to add errors or remove this popular
extension. Not yet anyway, because it's too popular to do that now.
The documentation team is discussing the database security situation, and
educating users to move away from the commonly used ext/mys
On Jun 29, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Pascal COURTOIS
> wrote:
>> Le 16/06/2011 08:10, Stas Malyshev a écrit :
>>> Hi!
>>>
what I did every single time. Among all my bug reports I had one
answer from decoder-...@own-hero.net (thanks to h
> AFAIK that got into it, but the fixes for the related crashes did not.
Nope, not until alpha2... but it's something to look forward to, and it's
another reason for people to continue testing future alpha releases. :)
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To u
On Jun 28, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 6/28/11 9:55 AM, Derick Rethans wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>>
>> I'm actually surprised it isn't in there. I did write that document
>> some eons ago. But anyway, let's add it then :)
>
> OK, as soon as we
On Jun 20, 2011, at 5:15 AM, David Soria Parra wrote:
> Hi Internals,
>
> we have been working on getting an rfc together on how to deal with
> votes on rfcs. We aim to provide a simple mechaism for votes while
> still maintaining freedom on how to do votes and how to work on rfcs.
>
> I want
On Jun 20, 2011, at 7:01 AM, Robert Eisele wrote:
> Could I please get an wiki account? I've posted some stuff on the mailing
> list, but I think it would be better to document all this stuff on a central
> place, also with regard to get these things rated.
Greetings Robert,
Considering the num
On Jun 15, 2011, at 11:34 PM, dukeofgaming wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Pascal COURTOIS
> wrote:
>
>> Le 16/06/2011 08:01, dukeofgaming a écrit :
>>
>>> Sorry if the question is dumb, but, how many core developers does PHP
>> have?,
>>> how many in total (including non-core contrib
Hello everyone,
Please keep this off-topic discussion on a single list, and in this case,
php...@lists.php.net. Thanks :)
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
> To get back to the "improve docs" part I'd gladly collect the artifacts,
> mails, wiki entries, etc of this effort and try help create this
> "contribute page" Pierre spoke of.
Here are a couple of resources to help with this:
- https://wiki.php.net/doc/scratchpad/wheretohelp
- http://www.
On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:10 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>
>> And this is a call for someone or some people to do the work by raising a
>> hand, posting an RFC, writing code, whatever it takes. But I think people
>> ass
On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>>> I don't feel quite so bad now about not being able to update my own builds,
>>> but a matching Additional Extensions section for the x86 builds would ju
> I don't feel quite so bad now about not being able to update my own builds,
> but a matching Additional Extensions section for the x86 builds would just
> finish the picture.
If the PHP+Windows community developed a reliable system that built [most] all
PECL extensions, then we would link to
Hello everyone,
The following categorizes bundled/enabled/core, and lists extensions as they
stand today (compiled via snaps). I don't exactly know what this means, but
writing this feels appropriate:
- Bundled : An extension that is bundled
* ./configure --enable-ext (or --with-ext) is a
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:20 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> I'd to say that I'm very happy to finally see such discussions
> happening, let sort the base (99% is done by our existing RFC about
> release process, let adopt it already!) and move on with 5.4.
This is a prime example of what we're talking abo
On Jun 4, 2011, at 6:00 PM, Rasmus wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 09:03 PM, Scott MacVicar wrote:
>> On Jun 4, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
In parallel I'd also see if there are any key extensions which we
think are mainstream, stable and well maintained enough to be
> In parallel I'd also see if there are any key extensions which we think are
> mainstream, stable and well maintained enough to be included. For example,
> http comes to mind.
Enable pecl_http by default (or, always), and bundle APC.
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:08 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Am 01.06.2011 14:44, schrieb Johannes Schlüter:
>> I mentioned this before: I like the Ubuntu model:
>>
>> * One development branch for the next version
>> * One current version
>> * One "long term" supported version
>
> +1
+1
Regards,
P
Greetings,
It'd be beneficial if we waited to discuss this topic until after Sean proposes
an RFC this weekend.
Regards,
Philip
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Jun 4, 2011, at 3:07 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>
>> [VOTE] is a good idea, let's make it [VOTE].
>>
>>> There is no plugin used for it yet, and that's my problem with it.
>>
>> Well, votes aren't announced yet either :) I'll try to get it
> Does anyone know of a particular reason it is not documented?
> (I'd be happy to document and provide the ridiculously simple patch of
> returning NULL...)
Greetings Matt,
Documenting DOM is messy/tricky (and underdocumented), but:
- http://php.net/domelement.getattribute
Here's one option
On Jun 2, 2011, at 2:46 PM, Richard Riley wrote:
> Hannes Magnusson writes:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 21:03, Richard Riley wrote:
>>>
>>> Could some kind soul advise me on how to install php docs localy and
>>> have the excellent patterns search work based on an sqllite database?
>>
>> htt
On Jun 2, 2011, at 1:19 PM, Sean Coates wrote:
>>> If people vote on this now, will further discussion about how this SHOULD
>>> work be shut down with "we already voted on this"?
>> which other discussions do you wish? Json is clearly not an option and
>> not enough people (but a couple) likes o
On Jun 2, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Peter Lind wrote:
> On 2 June 2011 16:50, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 02.06.2011 16:24, schrieb Marcel Esser:
>>> I am not convinced that making this an error is a good idea.
>>>
>>> If I receive a $_GET/$_POST value that I expect to be a string value, but I
On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>
>> I'm choosing to ignore this voting mechanism because it feels wrong.
>
>
> We always voted based on php.net accounts (@php.net that is), whether
> it is a
>>> Reminder: Pls add your votes here:
>>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortsyntaxforarrays/vote
>>
>>
>> Who is allowed to vote?, are userland votes still going to count?, if so,
>> how does one qualify as userland voter?.
>
> I think the one that is active can be a voter.
> Or maybe the ones tha
On Jun 1, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Sean Coates wrote:
>> This discussion seems to lack real-world examples…
>>
>> Derick wrote:
>>> I'm still -1 on it. It makes absolutely unreadable code (yes, also in
>>> JavaScript with f.e. MongoDB).
>>
>>
On May 31, 2011, at 11:05 PM, dukeofgaming wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I remember having wiki editing privileges not so long ago, I was going to
> enter and add the entry for discussions at
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortsyntaxforarrays but I cannot edit anymore.
> Would it be too much to ask to have them
On May 31, 2011, at 3:06 PM, Rasmus wrote:
> On 05/31/2011 02:59 PM, Michael Shadle wrote:
>> Forgive me for injecting my $.02 here but what is the original reason
>> for changing the most basic language syntax to be a little bit
>> shorter?
>>
>> Is it hurting anyone to type out "array()" or so
Hello everyone,
There are differing opinions on this matter so I'll base a conclusion on
current SVN:
- Both (INF==INF and INF===INF) are true in PHP 5_4 because it's the correct
behavior
- PHP 5_3 will continue as is for BC reasons (INF==INF = false, INF===INF =
true)
So unless something cha
A few notes worth mentioning:
- That RFC moved from fail to 'under discussion' a few weeks ago, although it
hasn't been edited
- Most people are now for it, or at least that's the general feeling on IRC
(#php.pecl) these past few weeks
- Discussing it is on the 5.4 TODO ( https://wiki.php.net/t
On May 28, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 06:05, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>>
>> expose_php = Off?
>
>I think what he and others mean is that they want the option to
> leave the logo, credits, et cetera, completely out of the build at
> compile time.
We
On May 27, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Alexey Shein wrote:
> It seems my last letter didn't came to the list, resending it.
>
> So this is new version of this patch - with curl_multi_exec involved
> and accordingly changed tests. Let me know what you think about it.
>
> Additionally, I found another test
Hello geeks,
A geek is needed to clarify PHP bug #45712. This is an edge case but the test
(bug45712.phpt) contains code similar to the following:
That's how it's behaved since ~forever (AFAICT) and remains in 5.3.7-dev, but
PHP 5.4.0-dev changes behavior so both now return true.
Is this is
>
> @all
>
> Can we decide on decoupling matter?
It feels like decoupling http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> apparently somebody else brought up the shortag(specifically the topic again, and I've noticed that you moved the rfc from declined to "In
> discussion" recently (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortags?do=revisions), so I
> would like to know that are these rules still hold, or did something happen
On May 11, 2011, at 6:02 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> We once had a matrix showing test results per setup (OS, phpversion,
>> per configure switches) but it was someones pet project and the code
>> has long since been lost (he looked years ago). Maybe such a beast
>> would be useful.
>
>
On May 11, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 02:10 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
>
>> So, that's the concern there. But if the alpha is simply a trick to convince
>> people to test out a specific PHP 5.4 snapshot, and feel 5.4 is real, then
>> d
On May 11, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Waiting a month or two longer is worth it, especially considering the
>> 5.4 momentum feels real this time around. We're creating a real TODO,
>> and have a real tentative timeline, so forcing a premature alpha at
>> this point (thus
On May 11, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 18:03 +, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>> Stas, in the past we had alphas. Is there any reason why we wouldn't
>> roll one out asap? (revert the typehints stuff and go).
>
> +1
Waiting a month or two longer is worth it, es
On May 11, 2011, at 4:00 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:30 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> On 05/11/2011 01:39 AM, dukeofgaming wrote:
>>
>>> The link doesn't work, but I'm assuming it is this one?:
>>> https://wiki.php.net/todo
>>>
>>
>> That was supposed to be wiki.php
On May 9, 2011, at 2:38 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I see the array shortcuts are on your todo discussion list there. We
>> probably shouldn't get into a full discussion on that since it will span
>> hundreds of messages. But if any of the folks who voted no last time
>> around have chan
Greetings Moriyoshi and all,
Are people still thinking about this? And how about applying the
current/revised patch to trunk thus making it easier to play with and break,
but not freeze its features/API yet.
Also the wiki is up again so:
- RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/builtinwebserver
- P
On Apr 15, 2011, at 2:23 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> 2011/4/1 Hannes Magnusson :
>> 2011/3/31 Pål-Kristian Hamre :
>>> We need access to this repository to commit changes to the infrastructure:
>>> https://svn.php.net/repository/systems/
>>>
>>
>> Verified. He is working on bringing the wiki
On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Am 31.03.2011 17:52, schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf:
>> Argh! Everyone should be forced to learn a bit of C. Like many PHP
>> functions, the name and argument order is right out of libc. If you type
>> "man strstr" at your (non-Windows) prompt you
On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Brian Moon wrote:
>>> How would str_contains() be different from strstr()?
>>>
>>>
>> They differ in the return type
>
> $instr = (bool)strstr($string1, $string2);
>
> done. No need for a new function.
Well, to be clearer:
bool str_contains( haystack, needle [,
On Mar 30, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Martin Jansen wrote:
> On 30.03.11 21:36, Dan Birken wrote:
>> As for adding other string functions, I agree, I think there are a lot of
>> them that would be great to add. starts_with & ends_with for sure.
>
> Both str_startswith and str_endswith have been suggeste
On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:55 PM, Ben Schmidt wrote:
>> - Don't write long e-mails to a mailing list, write an RFC
>> http://wiki.php.net/rfc?do=register
>
> OK. I tried to do this. I got an account (username:isfs), but it seems
> it is nothing more than an unprivileged account--I don't seem to be abl
Sorry for moving offtopic, but if the PHP syntax is going to change then we
should revisit other proposals that add/change syntax. For example, I think the
short syntax for arrays was declined [from 5.3] mainly because it introduced a
new syntax at a time we wanted to preserve BC:
- http://wik
> Please not I'm not requesting to do it now and here, only trying to
> get a feeling/poll about git usage.
The main reasons we moved to SVN and not Git include:
- Less of a learning curve, because SVN is like CVS
- Most of the CVS->SVN work was already finished
- A few old timers didn't want
On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:45 PM, Stanley Sufficool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Daniel Convissor
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:41:48PM +0100, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>> you can get pwn3d with magic_quotes_gpc = On
>>
>> That goes without saying. None the less, it will be problem
On Nov 17, 2010, at 9:40 PM, Larry Garfield wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:19:05 pm Philip Olson wrote:
>>> What are your inputs on this matter?
>>
>> I'm struggling with this topic. We must do something, but it's important to
>> understan
> What are your inputs on this matter?
I'm struggling with this topic. We must do something, but it's important to
understand that plenty of people unknowingly rely upon this security feature
that's still enabled by default. Granted 5.3 does generate E_DEPRECATED errors
when magical quotes are
On Nov 11, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Will Fitch
> wrote:
>
>> +1 here.
>>
>> Just want to make sure the RFC is written and discussed before the patch is
>> submitted.
>>
>
> I just registered for Wiki access and am waiting for the account to
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
