On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Leigh wrote:
> On 15 February 2015 at 13:51, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>> Extensions "that deal with numbers" are all going to need updating. So
>>> probably every extension?
>>
>> Anything accepting a zval rather than a long through zpp, but the changes
>> are quite
On 15 February 2015 at 13:51, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>> Extensions "that deal with numbers" are all going to need updating. So
>> probably every extension?
>
> Anything accepting a zval rather than a long through zpp, but the changes are
> quite small in most cases. It’s a much smaller change than,
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> On 02/15/2015 05:45 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On 15 Feb 2015, at 12:39, Xinchen Hui wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
Hi everyone,
I should’ve done this a long time ago, but I
On 02/15/2015 05:45 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On 15 Feb 2015, at 12:39, Xinchen Hui wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I should’ve done this a long time ago, but I’m going to hold a vote on this
>>> RFC. The implementation isn’
Hi,
> On 15 Feb 2015, at 13:07, Leigh wrote:
>
> I think this adds a ton of unnecessary complexity and isn't worth the
> breaks or performance degradations that come with it.
>
> We already have big integer support in the form of the GMP extension,
> and it is very clear when you are working wi
Hi,
> On 15 Feb 2015, at 12:39, Xinchen Hui wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I should’ve done this a long time ago, but I’m going to hold a vote on this
>> RFC. The implementation isn’t finished, but the remaining work isn’t
>> impossibl
On 15 February 2015 at 02:46, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I should’ve done this a long time ago, but I’m going to hold a vote on this
> RFC. The implementation isn’t finished, but the remaining work isn’t
> impossible to surmount (though help would certainly be appreciated). RFCs can
Hey:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I should’ve done this a long time ago, but I’m going to hold a vote on this
> RFC. The implementation isn’t finished, but the remaining work isn’t
> impossible to surmount (though help would certainly be appreciated
I do not know their plan. but in china, we will happy in our holiday
till 2015.03.05 (The last important holiday The Lantern Festival )
then we will back to work.
This is traditional chinese holidays.
Learn mandarin should be fun, welcome you guys come to china . It's
now our very important holi
Hi Netroby,
> On 15 Feb 2015, at 04:00, Netroby wrote:
>
> The time range is Chinese lunar new year.
Oh! My bad, I was unaware of that. (I really should’ve noticed that, given I am
learning Mandarin.)
When do festivities etc. end? What would be a good time to extend it to?
Thanks!
--
Andrea
The time range is Chinese lunar new year. I am not sure @laruence and
@reeze be on holidays or not.
The vote time range can be extended ?
I have no the ability to vote. but i guess this RFC is very well for
PHP programmers.
Appreciate your time.
Netroby
--
PHP In
11 matches
Mail list logo
