Re: [PHP-DEV] New function: spl_object_id() or spl_object_handle()

2014-11-28 2:13 GMT+01:00 Bostjan Skufca : > Hello everyone, > > this is a proposal to add new function to PHP core: spl_object_id() > > > The story: > > Recently I was debugging some larger libraries and sorely missed a function > that would return an object ID. A function called spl_obj

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Abstract final classes

Hi, 2014-11-27 4:47 GMT+01:00 guilhermebla...@gmail.com < guilhermebla...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > I worked on an implementation of a somehow controversial concept that > exists in hack and C#: abstract final classes. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/abstract_final_class > > The example is a little bi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Not all archives in http://museum.php.net/php5/ ?

2013/9/30 Yasuo Ohgaki > Hi all, > > I would like to get _exactly_ the same sources that has been released. > I though all archives are stored in museum.php.net, but apparently not. > > http://museum.php.net/php5/ > > Is there any place that archives old release tar ball? > Or anyone could copy t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Automatic Property Initialization

2013/9/27 Matthieu Napoli > Le 27/09/2013 09:17, Gordon Oheim a écrit : > > >> Independent but related to >> >> - >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**constructor-promotion >> >> I wrote an RFC about porting Dart-like Automatic Property Initialization >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Automatic Property Initialization

2013/9/27 Gordon Oheim > > Independent but related to > > - > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**constructor-promotion > > I wrote an RFC about porting Dart-like Automatic Property Initialization > to PHP. Nikic was so generous to provide an initial PoC fo

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Classes

2013/9/27 Michael Wallner > On 27 September 2013 09:55, Nicolas Grekas > wrote: > > If you need access to the methods in AProxifier then why does the > anonymous > >> class extend A, you should extend AProxifier as you would with any other > >> class. > >> > > > > Because A has the behavior I wa

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Anonymous Classes

2013/9/23 Joe Watkins > On 09/23/2013 07:39 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > >> Morning All, >> >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**anonymous_classes >> >> I'd like to hear thoughts regarding the addition of anonymous >> classes, patch included. >> >> C

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Anonymous Classes

2013/9/23 Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink > Everyone, > > As a lurker i rarely have anthing to say, but this time i'd like to make an > exception: I see some usability for this type of usage, but would like to > disagree on the extra class... > My usage would be more in line with JSON way of p

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Classes

2013/9/23 Joe Watkins > On 09/23/2013 02:43 PM, Lars Strojny wrote: > >> Hi Joe, >> >> what about serialization for those classes? >> >> cu, >> Lars >> >> Am 23.09.2013 um 08:39 schrieb Joe Watkins : >> >> Morning All, >>> >>> >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**anonymous_classes

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Classes

2013/9/23 Rasmus Lerdorf > On 09/22/2013 11:39 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/anonymous_classes > > > > I'd like to hear thoughts regarding the addition of anonymous > > classes, patch included. > > I am having a hard time picturing a real-world use-case for this. >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Allowing is_* functions to accept multiple parameters

2013/9/18 Igor Wiedler > On Sep 18, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Leigh wrote: > > > Hi Internals. > > > > How do you feel about expanding the is_* functions to accept multiple > > parameters similar to the way isset() already does? > > > > ... > > > > Thoughts? > > For isset() there is a good reason to do

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Function autoloading

2013/9/3 Levi Morrison > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Levi Morrison > > wrote: > > >> In which case we have very different ideas about what good design > > >> is and would never come to any agreement on that. > > > > > > > > > This is

Re: AW: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Skipping parameters take 2

2013/9/2 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > I would not agree with your argument that it should be introduced > because it > > is requested by real people for years and it is simple to add. Isn't that > > pretty much the same as "because we can"? > > No, it is pretty much the opposite. It is "because peop

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Skipping parameters take 2

2013/9/2 Pierre Joye > hi Stas, > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Stas Malyshev > wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I've finally took some time to revive the skipping parameter RFC and > > patch. For those who doesn't remember what it is please see: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/skipparams > > TLDR versio

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Skipping parameters take 2

2013/9/2 Lester Caine > Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > >> >> you write your code where you copypaste the default value >> some time passes >> somebody changes the default value in the called function definition >> your code now calls the function with a non-default value. >> > > Actually THAT is a proble

[PHP-DEV] Re: Function autoloading

2013/8/31 Vartolomei Nicolae > So you say you will create a file for every function you want to support > autoloading? > I already _have_ create files for functions of a namespace... Closed source. > As I already asked, tell us about realworld use case, for example where > this could improve s

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [DRAFT] [RFC] Function autoloading

2013/8/31 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > We got a performance win from exactly this at Facebook. We have some > > extensions in HHVM to autoload that allowed us to remove almost all > > our *_once calls. > > But autoloading does not remove require - you still have to load the > files. But it remove

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Syntax for variadic functions

2013/8/30 jbo...@openmv.com > On Wed Aug 28 11:47 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/variadics > > Interesting idea, expanding on: > > function log($message, ...$options) {} > > It would seem convenient to allow ...$options to be passed as a key-value > array of argument

Re: [PHP-DEV] [DRAFT] [RFC] Function autoloading

2013/8/30 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > Well, static methods aren't the same as functions. > > The big difference being? > A function is stateless [1], a method isn't. A function operates only on the passed parameters [1], the method operates on the parameters and the context it inherits from the in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [DRAFT] [RFC] Function autoloading

2013/8/30 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > I have created a new draft RFC implementing function and constant > > autoloading in master: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/function_autoloading > > > > All feedback is welcome. > > I think it is an unnecessary complication. Classes fit autoloader > paradigm

Re: [PHP-DEV] [DRAFT] [RFC] Function autoloading

2013/8/30 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > I disagree on the basis that namespaced functions/constants *do* fit the > > same autoloading paradigm. > > If they're already namespaced, what prevents one to put it in a class > and use good old PSR-compatible loading? > Well, static methods aren't the same

Re: [PHP-DEV] Request #65501 uniqid(): More entropy parameter should be true by default

2013/8/22 Leigh > > On 22 August 2013 13:39, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > >> Tbh I don't get the real problem with the _current_ behaviour. Who need >> the >> entropy, can set it as second parameter and I am not sure, if it is wise >> to >> use u

Re: [PHP-DEV] Request #65501 uniqid(): More entropy parameter should be true by default

2013/8/22 Yasuo Ohgaki > Hi all, > > I realized that not many users are using "more entropy" parameter > Therefore, I made > > Request #65501 uniqid(): More entropy parameter should be true by default > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=65501 > > The comment title explains what this FR is. > > Any

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Constant Scalar Expressions

Hi, Just asking: Does this cover only declarations, or every constant expression, for example $weeks = $secs / (60 * 60 * 24 * 7); becomes to the opcode-equivalent of $weeks = $secs / (604800); ? 2013/8/14 Anthony Ferrara > Stas, > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 5:01 AM, Stas Malyshev >wrot

RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Constant Scalar Expressions

Am 14.08.2013 08:17 schrieb "Christian Stoller" : > > > Hello all, > > > > I'd like to propose a new RFC for 5.NEXT: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/const_scalar_expressions > > > > This allows for defining constant expressions which are resolved at compile > > time. > > What should that be for? >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Importing namespaced functions

2013/7/23 Igor Wiedler > Hi Sebastian, > > The reason is precisely to avoid BC breaks, such as the one that you > quoted from the FAQ. > > Are you suggesting that such a BC break is acceptable for 5.6? > I don't fear BCs and actually I prefer BCs against weak compromises. This depends on the wei

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Importing namespaced functions

2013/7/23 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > But actually I don't see: Why is "use" not enough? As far as I can see > your > > example, why it would introduce a BC, doesn't really match to original > > Consider this: > > use a\b\c as foo; > > foo(); > > Now it would resolve to global function foo(). If us

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Importing namespaced functions

Hi, Thanks for that. But actually I don't see: Why is "use" not enough? As far as I can see your example, why it would introduce a BC, doesn't really match to original question, why "use function" is used. Especially I don't see any ambiguity: foo(); // Always a function. You cannot call classes

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Importing namespaced functions

Hi, Whats about constants? Regards, Sebastian Am 19.07.2013 19:30 schrieb "Igor Wiedler" : > Hello internals, > > I posted the initial idea for a use_function RFC a few months back. I > would like to make the proposal official now, and open it for discussion. > > I also did some work on a patch

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP proposal on modular systems

2013/7/16 Giuseppe Ronca > You can have multiple objects from the same type in different >> implemenations in the same process? >> > > > No i'm not saying it. > > OK, what then? You have A and B, that both rely on X, but in version 1 and 2. Both A and B are used at the same time. How can now be

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP proposal on modular systems

2013/7/16 Giuseppe Ronca > I've studied Composer and as i thought ..it's a "component installer" > (implementing an autoload system) .. nothing else ( i can have similar > result using git submodules ) > > anyway , *you can have a class collision using or not using composer ( it > doesn't solve i

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP proposal on modular systems

2013/7/15 Lester Caine > Marco Pivetta wrote: > >> PS i'm not so practice with composer ( used few times ) but when modular >> >>> >systems , such as CMS , give the possibility to extends them with >>> external >>> >components...i don't think that composer could solve this problem. >>> > >>> >> I

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP proposal on modular systems

2013/7/14 Giuseppe Ronca > Php is now used by many CMS, many of which use a modular system with a wide > range of add-ons developed by third parties. This can cause various > conflicts, such as when two or more external components using the same > library (i.g. with a different version) in this c

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Protocol Type Hinting

2013/6/27 Anthony Ferrara > Stas et al, > > > So, the question of what is the difference between the two errors > > remains unanswered. If the whole diff is that one of the errors has word > > "recoverable" in the message, it's not substantial difference at all and > > one that does not require n

Re: [PHP-DEV] New syntax for multidimensional array loop with foreach

2013/6/27 Florin Patan > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Christian Stoller > wrote: > > Hi internals, > > > > during my current work I had an idea for shorter array iteration with > foreach. I haven’t seen such a syntax until now, but I think it is easy to > understand ;-) > > > > Maybe you kno

Re: [PHP-DEV] New syntax for multidimensional array loop with foreach

2013/6/27 Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink > I'd thought this would have been `solved` by allowing the list statement in > foreach ( > > http://nl3.php.net/manual/en/control-structures.foreach.php#control-structures.foreach.list > ) > > Doesnt that solve your problem already? > This is only us

Re: [PHP-DEV] Gauging Interest:RFC to add map() function

2013/6/27 Tjerk Anne Meesters > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Florin Patan > wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Tjerk Anne Meesters > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Jeremy Curcio > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello, > > >> > > >> I would like to submit an RFC to add

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC Proposal: New assign value operator

2013/6/26 Robert Stoll > As far as I see it, it is kind of an operator overload mechanism for the > assign operator. > This can be useful for small utility classes such as Money, Email etc. > > An example was given: > $price = new MoneyValue(); > $price := 29.99; > > Instead of writing something

Re: [PHP-DEV] supporting the final keyword for properties

2013/5/28 Amaury Bouchard > 2013/5/28 Sebastian Krebs > >>print($$b); >>> >> >> print(constant($b)); >> > > It's definitely different. In your example you have to know that you are > manipulating constants only. > > And in y

Re: [PHP-DEV] supporting the final keyword for properties

2013/5/28 Amaury Bouchard > 2013/5/28 Maciek Sokolewicz > > > It’s a good idea in general but what about having it for variables as > >> well? Could open interesting possibilities for an optimizer. > >> > >> final $foo = "str"; > >> $foo = "bar"; // bails out > >> > >> Don't we already have tha

Re: [PHP-DEV] idea: letting the line number and file name be set via user_error

2013/5/7 Bob Weinand > > Am 7.5.2013 um 22:11 schrieb Stas Malyshev : > > > Hi! > > > >> And today we have the problem that we cannot use in any useful manner > >> trigger_error in libraries, when we don't know where the error > >> originates from. You debug today trigger_error's in libraries wit

Re: [PHP-DEV] idea: letting the line number and file name be set via user_error

2013/5/7 Bob Weinand > > Am 7.5.2013 um 21:07 schrieb Sebastian Krebs : > > > > > 2013/5/7 Bob Weinand > >> >> Am 7.5.2013 um 18:25 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs : >> >> > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Thomas Anderson >> wrote: >> &

Re: [PHP-DEV] idea: letting the line number and file name be set via user_error

2013/5/7 Thomas Anderson > > > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > >> >> >> >> 2013/5/7 Thomas Anderson >> >>> If you do user_error('whatever') it'll show, as the line number for that >>> error, th

Re: [PHP-DEV] idea: letting the line number and file name be set via user_error

2013/5/7 Bob Weinand > > Am 7.5.2013 um 18:25 schrieb Ferenc Kovacs : > > > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Thomas Anderson > wrote: > > > >> If you do user_error('whatever') it'll show, as the line number for that > >> error, the line number on which that user_error() call is made. It'd be > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] idea: letting the line number and file name be set via user_error

2013/5/7 Thomas Anderson > If you do user_error('whatever') it'll show, as the line number for that > error, the line number on which that user_error() call is made. It'd be > nice if you could control the line number and file name that was displayed. > eg. > > function test() { > user_erro

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Importing namespaced functions

ause it isn't such a big deal to simply use the prefixed one, so the benefit seems quite small to me :X use MyFoo\Bar\MathFunctions as math; $x = math\sin($y); Just saying :) Regards, Sebastian > > On May 2, 2013, at 11:40 PM, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > > > Hi,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Importing namespaced functions

Hi, Are you going to cover autoloading of functions too? Regards, Sebastian 2013/5/2 Igor Wiedler > Hi internals, > > Since there's been no major objection to this proposed RFC, I will go > ahead and create it on the wiki. I will amend it to address some of the > points that were discussed so

Re: [PHP-DEV] property de-referencing

2013/5/1 Rasmus Schultz > Any PHP dev who works with a mainstream framework does this daily, but the > frameworks rely on strings for property-names. > > Take this example from the Symfony manual, for example: > > > class Task > { > protected $task; > > pro

Re: [PHP-DEV] Could we kill call_user_func?

2013/3/15 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > why not enable then this "getCallback()();"? > > There's an RFC for that: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/fcallfcall > but it has some edge cases which I didn't have time to figure out yet. > In the long run I think it would be great :) Earlier I also realized, that

Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow all callables to be called directly

2013/3/15 Steve Clay > My subject was misleading. I didn't mean to suggest call_user_func() be > removed, just be made unnecessary by direct call syntax. > > This should make the inconsistency clearer: http://3v4l.org/L8Yvq > > On 3/15/13 10:21 AM, Sebastian Krebs wrote:

Re: [PHP-DEV] Could we kill call_user_func?

2013/3/15 Steve Clay > I'm sure this question has been discussed before, so if anyone can point > to me to links or briefly recap I'd appreciate it. > > Why can't we make $someCallable() always work? E.g. http://3v4l.org/FLpAq > > I understand the problem of $obj->foo() where ->foo is a callable

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] unset(): return bool if the variable has existed

2013/3/7 Stas Malyshev > Hi! > > > RFC updated. > > > > Any other comments about this RFC? > > Could you provide a use case for this - which practical value this has? > > It also still contains factually incorrect claim that unset() is a > function and that there's some "inconsistency" in the fac

Re: [PHP-DEV] Memory warning hook

2013/3/5 Lazare Inepologlou > 2013/3/5 Tom Boutell > > > Can't you do this already? memory_limit can be fetched via ini_read, > > and together with memory_get_usage you should be able to check for > > this sort of thing. Admittedly having to parse memory_limit (which can > > be in various units)

Re: [PHP-DEV] I would like to write an RFC for the addition of an internal keyword

2013/2/28 Jens Riisom Schultz > Hi everyone, > > (I got "hooked off" this discussion, so I have tried to keep up by reading > the digest... This makes it impossible for me to correctly interleave my > comments, so I'll just "top post" or whatever the term is) (I'm sure this > has been mentioned b

Re: [PHP-DEV] I would like to write an RFC for the addition of an internal keyword

2013/2/27 Steve Clay > On 2/27/13 3:18 AM, Nikita Nefedov wrote: > >> I, for one, think it should be solved on the IDE side. I used a lot of >> Doctrine's internal >> methods lately and if they would be not accessible I wouldn't be able to >> do a lot of things. >> Of course internal methods/clas

Re: [PHP-DEV] Add get_object_constants and get_class_constants

2013/2/27 Frank Schenk > Hi Crypto Compress, > > big congratz to that name, your mummy Hash Compress and your daddy Image > Compress must be very proud! > > SCNR > > Am 02/27/2013 03:54 PM, schrieb Crypto Compress: > > Hello Mike, > > > > thank you! It is a useful feature to me. > > > > class MyB

Re: [PHP-DEV] I would like to write an RFC for the addition of an internal keyword

2013/2/27 Jens Riisom Schultz > Hi, > > I just want to get a feel for whether the following idea would be > instantly rejected (for example I get the feeling that adding keywords is a > big deal): > > Often, when writing frameworks, you need to make public or protected > functionality or classes

Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow (...)->foo() expressions not only for `new`

2013/2/26 Lazare Inepologlou > Hello Nikita, > > 2013/2/25 Nikita Popov > > > Hi internals! > > > > PHP 5.4 added support for expressions of the kind (new Foo)->bar(), (new > > Foo)->bar and (new Foo)['bar']. > > > > > I guess it must have been discussed, but Is there any technical reason or > c

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC Autoboxing Draft

2013/2/25 Nils Andre > Hi Everyone on the list, I have no RFC Karma here so far, so I post this to > the list at first. There has been ongoing discussion about new APIs and so > fort, so this is a suggestion for language cleanup by Autoboxing. I'd > really appreciate comments. > > == Introduction

Re: [PHP-DEV] Late FQCN resolution using ::class

2013/2/25 Jens Riisom Schultz > Hi everybody, > > I have read up on this, and done some testing. > > First up, my findings with PHP5.5 alpha5: > > namespace spacy; > > class classy { > public static function fqcn() { > /* This works but is not useful enough: */ >

Re: [PHP-DEV] rfc:trailing-comma-function-args

2013/2/22 Rasmus Schultz > I've been thinking about this RCF for a while now: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/trailing-comma-function-args > > It just doesn't seem necessary - the only time I've ever found something > like this to be necessary, is when a function takes closures or other very > long

Re: [PHP-DEV] Pull request for array_filter() improvement

2013/2/21 Tjerk Anne Meesters > Hi, > > I found myself wanting a feature of array_filter() with which I can perform > filtering based on the array key instead of the value. > > To scratch this itch, I decided to dive into C again and just add the > feature. My proposal is to add a third argument

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 6 : a new API ?

2013/2/20 Klaus Ufo > Hi there ! > > We all know that the current PHP API has flaws. Maybe we could use > namespaces to build a new coherent PHP API ? Like : > > - \arr > - \num > - \str > > and so on. Advantages : > > - no more global functions > Just to throw that in: Even if you pack them int

Re: [PHP-DEV] File system watcher/monitoring

2013/2/15 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa > On 15/02/13 14:20, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > >> 2013/2/15 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa >> >> Hi Stas, >>> >>> >>> On 14/02/13 22:37, Stas Malyshev wrote: >>> >>> Hi! >>>> >>>>

Re: [PHP-DEV] File system watcher/monitoring

2013/2/14 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa > Hello Julien, > > > On 14/02/13 15:29, Julien Pauli wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa < >> ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net> wrote: >> >> Hi internal, >>> >>> A missing feature in PHP is a file system watcher/monitoring available >>> fo

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC mysqlnd.localhost_override

2013/2/12 Asbjørn Sannes > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**mysqlnd_localhost_override > > I propose we introduce a new option called mysqlnd.localhost_override > which enables a system administrator or php distributor to configure how > localhost

Re: [PHP-DEV] (non)growing memory while creating anoymous functions via eval()

2013/2/3 Sebastian Bergmann > Am 03.02.2013 18:07, schrieb Sebastian Bergmann: > > Can you explain why you are using eval() instead of a real anonymous > > function? Thanks! > > Please ignore my email; I mixed up create_function() and eval(). Then > again, your code still does not make sense to

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal: php://memory/ (& ://temp/)

2013/1/31 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa > > On 31/01/13 12:00, Sebastian Krebs wrote: > >> 2013/1/31 Chris Wright >> >> I propose the following syntax: >>>> >>>> php://memory/ >>>> php://temp//maxmemory:<**size> >>>&

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal: php://memory/ (& ://temp/)

2013/1/31 Chris Wright > > I propose the following syntax: > > > > php://memory/ > > php://temp//maxmemory: > > I would very much like to see this as well. > > Would this also allow you to open multiple pointers to the same bucket? > > For example would this work? > > > $fp = fopen('ph

Re: [PHP-DEV] I think that "Function naming inconsistency" bug deservers more attention

2013/1/25 Pierre Joye > hi, > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Martin Keckeis > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > you are right Damian. > > > > Also today on a german page: > > > http://it-republik.de/php/news/Machen-wir-das-Namensschema-der-PHP-Funktionen-einheitlich%21-066539.html > > > > Relating t

Re: [PHP-DEV] HEADS UP: Upcoming Feature Freeze for PHP 5.5.0

2013/1/25 Thomas Bley > > One thing I can guarantee is that if we add it to core in its current > > condition it will delay 5.5 by 6+ months if not longer. > > I think it is fine if APC doesn't support all features of PHP. When > there is a clear documentation, everybody can decide if he skips so

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

2013/1/22 Lester Caine > Clint Priest wrote: > >> There seems to be a lot of userland support for this proposal from people >> who >> don't have voting rights. >> > > And what about the userland people who don't want the additional > complexity who don't have voting rights? Don't use it. Regard

Re: [PHP-DEV] [Reflection] Improve logic of ReflectionMethod->invokeArgs() for static methods

h 2 lines more comments). Also I don't know, what you mean by "call this method somewhere in the closure"; which closure?!? I guess you are in fact looking for regular instance methods. > > 2013/1/14 Sebastian Krebs : > > > > > > > > 2013/1/14

Re: [PHP-DEV] [Reflection] Improve logic of ReflectionMethod->invokeArgs() for static methods

2013/1/14 Alexander Lissachenko > Hi! It's my first letter here ) > > I want to suggest a small improvement for ReflectionMethod->invoke() > and ReflectionMethod->invokeArgs() methods to support LSB for > overridden static methods. Currently, for invoking static methods > first argument should be

Re: [PHP-DEV] FW: Functionality request/proposal

2013/1/14 Johannes Schlüter > On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 04:10 +, Paulo Henrique Torrens wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm currently interested in two features I'd like to see in PHP; how do > I proceed to request/propose them? I'd be glad to help implementing them as > well, if necessary. > > > > > > On

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reflection annotations reader

2013/1/6 Yahav Gindi Bar > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: > > > > > I think that our work is to isolate each annotation so it'll be easy to > >> access, then, it'll be easy enough to write the code that creates > "complex > >> annotations", such as constructors and so on,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Improve DateTime Class

Hi, are you mabe just looking for $date->add(new DateInterval('P15D')); ? 2012/12/10 Christian Stoller > Hi internals, > > what do you think about improving the modification functionality of the > DateTime class. I always get a cold shiver, when I write something like > this: > $date = new

Re: [PHP-DEV] DateTime::modify('now') is ignored, why?

2012/11/26 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa > Hi internals, > > I would to modify a \DateTime object to the current time, thus I wrote > this: > > $d = new \DateTime('+1 hour'); > $d->modify('now'); > > It did not work. Why? Because the documentation (http://php.net/datetime.* > *formats.relative

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation

2012/11/20 Lester Caine > Pierre Joye wrote: > >> https://www.google.de/search?**q=php+mysqli+tutorial >> > Which gives About 273,000 results and the first of them are causing more > confusion with PDO alternative. > > BUT newcomers know nothing

Re: [PHP-DEV] Autoload Functions RFC in 5.5?

2012/11/11 Patrick E. > Hi, > > > use My\Math > > Math\sin(); > > very intuitive. > And it would be a bit like Python Modules, > where you import symbols (including "global" variables of the module) > of modules: > > import math > print math.sin(math.pi) > > Const autoload would also make sense,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Autoload Functions RFC in 5.5?

2012/11/10 Laupretre François > Given the strong opposition of core devs against this feature in the past, > I want a vote on the RFC before I start working on a patch. > > Before this vote can take place, as you note, we need to solve the > function fallback issue: in theory, we should call the

Re: [PHP-DEV] Object comparison

Hi, Maybe it goes way to far, but there is a PECL-extension [1], that allows to overload every(?) operator. However, it seems to be unmaintained for 6 years now and will probably not work anymore, but it may be usable as a starting point. Python provides this too [2] Regards, Sebastian [1] http

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Implement a LoggerInterface to PHP

2012/11/8 Anthony Ferrara > Florin, > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Florin Razvan Patan > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > After a talk on the Symfony framework here: > > https://github.com/symfony/symfony/issues/5911 > > Long story short, the point that @Seldaek suggestion to have a common >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] Why isn't `spl_autoload` called for functions?

2012/11/7 Laupretre François > > De : sebastian.krebs.ber...@gmail.com > > > I hope you find more support on this than I had. Technically > > speaking, > > > it would be easy to extend autoloading to functions and constants. It > > > can even be done without BC breaks, combining 'old-style' and '

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] Why isn't `spl_autoload` called for functions?

2012/11/6 Laupretre François > > I've asked this question for a while (one, or two years ago or so). > > Must say, that I didn't remember the answer, but I would like to see > > autoloading for namespace-constants and functions too :) > > I proposed extending the autoload mechanism to functions a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP-WEBMASTER] Why isn't `spl_autoload` called for functions?

2012/11/5 Peter Cowburn > Pushing to internals list. > > On 5 November 2012 20:41, Levi Morrison wrote: > > I hear people complaining about this out in user-land all the time, but > > I've never seen anyone from internals respond. With practically everyone > > using an autoloader these days, it

Re: [PHP-DEV] Changing the default value of "true" for CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYHOST

2012/10/25 crankypuss > On 10/24/2012 11:34 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:03 AM, JJ wrote: >> >>> Hey all - I'd like start a discussion around pull request 221 >>> (https://github.com/php/php-**src/pull/221 >>> ). >>> >>> In sho

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Propety Accessors v1.1

2012/10/11 Clint Priest > Rather than go to the trouble of finding a reasonable way to hold a vote > on these issues, is there anyone against the following changes: > > 1) Eliminate the ability for an accessor to be called via > $o->__getHours(), the accessor functions will be completely unavaila

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Propety Accessors v1.1

2012/10/11 Clint Priest > Why is everyone so dead set against read-only and write-only? > my opinion 1. public read-only $hours { get { /* .. */ } set { /* .. */ } } And now? That this is even possible is reason enough for me. Especially now the engine must take care about this incon

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Propety Accessors v1.1

2012/10/9 Christian Kaps > Hi, > > typehinting should definitely be available for this feature. But I have > another question. Why not go more consistent with the rest of the language? > I have mentioned this previously as the first proposal comes up on the > list. In my opinion the AS3 getter an

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Implementing a core anti-XSS escaping class

2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Sebastian Krebs > wrote: > > > > > > 2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> > >> > >> If this is going to be implemented as a class, what i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Implementing a core anti-XSS escaping class

2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Sebastian Krebs > wrote: > > > > > > 2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> > >> > >> If this is going to be implemented as a class, what i

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: alternative callback syntax

2012/9/19 Steve Clay > Hello, > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**alternative_callback_syntaxis > a proposal for a simple alternative syntax for creating function > callbacks. > > The basics: Given a function/method call, replace the argument list

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC: Implementing a core anti-XSS escaping class

2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers > Hi all, > > > > If this is going to be implemented as a class, what is the advantage > of instantiation for this? Unless I'm missing it, I would propose that > the functions are made static. > > In other words, I would prefer this: > > echo Escaper::escapeHtml('test');

Re: [PHP-DEV] an configure option to "enable-all"

2012/9/17 jpauli > > > > I'm confused.. --enable-all is already supported, just like > --disable-all ? > > > > -Hannes > > AFAIR no :) We have a --disable-all , but no --enable-all. > > I'm +1 to add such an option if possible :) > > Julien.P > I don't like the idea, because once --enable-all is

Re: [PHP-DEV] an configure option to "enable-all"

Am 16.09.2012 22:20, schrieb Hannes Magnusson: On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Michael Felt wrote: Hi. My apologies if I missed an "obvious clue" somewhere, but I am looking for a configure option to enable nearly everything - to be supplemented by select disable statements. In the past I hav

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP build-in HTTP server and the HEAD method

Hi, As far as I can see everything works as expected: Because HEAD-requests should not send any content, you don't get any. Regards, Sebastian 2012/9/12 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa > Hello, > > It is probably me but it seems like the build-in HTTP server does not well > support the HEAD method. Here i

Re: [PHP-DEV] Combined assignment operator for short ternary

Am 26.08.2012 01:57, schrieb Ferenc Kovacs: > So you are saying that your (teams) IDE doesn't tell you the method > signature which contains also the default values? > I guess that the fact that many of the php core functions have optional > arguments and non null default

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Combined assignment operator for short ternary

Am 25.08.2012 01:53, schrieb Nikita Popov: On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Sebastian Krebs wrote: Hi, It's like with any other compound operator: A _real_ reason isn't there. But saying "It's not worth it" is something I can live with (even if I don't know

Re: [PHP-DEV] Combined assignment operator for short ternary

Am 25.08.2012 18:38, schrieb Ferenc Kovacs: would this trigger a notice if $foo is not defined? if yes, then it would be different from the current behavior of the ternary operator. Couldn't believe it, thus I tested it myself snip Don't know, what you are ta

  1   2   >