> On Oct 25, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Aidan Woods wrote:
>
>> anyways, don't reject mailing-list messages
>
> I don't reject the messages, Google rejects the messages because of failed
> DMARC requirements. See support[.]google[.]com/mail/answer/2451690
>
> The error occurs when the php mailing list
> On Aug 4, 2015, at 12:12 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> On 04/08/15 17:12, Terry Cullen wrote:
>> Redmine would be a good option. http://www.redmine.org/
>>
>> The feature list has most everything covered in this thread.
>> http://www.redmine.org/projects/redmine/wiki/Features
>
> Feature lis
>
> Wow, I had no idea that existed; what an incredibly ugly implementation. Even
> the name is weird (why "header" singular when it contains an array of
> headers?)
Actually, no. HTTP responses contain a single header at the protocol level,
but contain multiple lines. At some point, peopl
On 2013-05-01, at 6:28 AM, Guilherme Capilé wrote:
> Ola Ferenc,
>
> I'm willing to resurrect the development, how can I do it? Right now
> I'm having trouble in making a simple patch applied...
>
...
I support that. When someone has patches to commit, I don't think the
attitude should be
> Currently - A lot of ISP's are 'stuck' with PHP5.2 or earlier simply
I don't know if this is really the case. I work in this industry, and most
of the small to mid hosting company's use cPanel or Plesk, and both include PHP
5.3. I've personally seen very few issues moving from older PHP 5.
> > The PHP Wikipedia page is wrong about this too, and states that
> > addslashes() can be used instead of magic quotes. addslashes()
> > should probably be deprecated too (and it isn't Unicode aware
> > either, so removing it solves two problems).
>
> magic_quotes did the same thing than manual
> > The presentation implied that there was vast goals for the project,
> > including a lot of localization features. It seems like some of the
> > smaller features can be worked into a Son-of-Unicode project, and
> > maybe rolled into 5.5?
>
> it would be a good thing, but nobody stepped up for
...
> Running PHP on the JVM doesn't mean making PHP more like Java. It
> just means running the PHP language on a platform with a lot of
> benefits and advantages, and given the differences in engineering
> resources dedicated to each, one that's likely to continue to
> improve a lot faster than t
> > How has Unicode been lost?
> http://www.slideshare.net/andreizm/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-what-happened-to-unicode-and-php-6
Well, that explains how that particular project melted down, but what Unicode
features did people want out of that project that they didn't get? The
presentat
> With the loss of Unicode (which now lacks even an implementation
> plan)
...
How has Unicode been lost? There is tons of encoding stuff in PHP. As of 5.3,
you can use declare() to set the encoding for scripts. There is the mb_* stuff
for multibyte support. Obviously, saying PHP has "no U
> I sent this message to the php-general list, but haven't gotten any
> replies. Looking at the archives for the two lists, I realized that
> I'm probably much more likely to get informed responses from this
> list than the general list:
Probably a Caucho list would better. php-internals is pr
> > $sxe->addChild('child', 123); # Adds element with namespace
> > inherited from the parent
> > $sxe->addChild('child', 123, 'urn:somenamespace'); # Adds child
> > with specified namespace
> > $sxe->addChild('child', 123, -1); # Adds child with no namespace
> > qualification
>
> Again, there is
> While I think this would make SimpleXML more stupid, not less, as it
> seems
> braindead to me to allow users to create documents ambiguously and/or
> which
> essentially violate the XML namespace spec, I think the way to do
Allowing child elements to be unqualified is neither braindead or am
> That patch is not a good idea.
>
> Assume you have this situation:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Adding a child "baz" to bar and have it default to no namespace
Actually, my patch wouldn't change the default action of addChild(). It would
still inherit the namespace qualification of the parent
- Original Message -
> Looking at this in more detail...I don't think there's a bug here, or
> a
> patch required.
...
> > problem for me, as I have an XML schema that specifies that the
> > child
> > elements must not namespace qualified.
> Is this possible in an XML schema? I don't k
- Original Message -
> A similar problem regarding attributes, that got classified as a doc
> bug, but I
> don't think is one: http://bugs.php.net/42083
> If you're fishing around that area of the code, though, perhaps it is
> quite
> obvious to you where/how a patch should be made?
It is not possible to use SimpleXML to add a child element without a
namespace prefix to a parent element that has a namespace element. Instead, the
child element inherits the namespace prefix of the parent. So this XML
fragment:
abc
is impossible to construct with SimpleXML. The Simp
17 matches
Mail list logo
