hi,
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Anatol Belski wrote:
>> One doubt I have yet after investigating on #62852 is that issuing
>> php_error isn't recoverable, it might be much better to throw exception in
>> __wakeup(), just like __construct() does. This question crosses both
>> #62852 and #5
On Thu, March 14, 2013 14:14, Anatol Belski wrote:
> On Thu, March 14, 2013 12:42, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 13 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 11:42 +, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
>
>
On Thu, March 14, 2013 12:42, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
>
>
>> On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 11:42 +, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
>>>
What is the way you had in the mind to achieve the
string<->integer
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 11:42 +, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> > >
> > > What is the way you had in the mind to achieve the
> > > string<->integer conversions?
> >
> > atoll() (or atoq()).
>
> Please ta
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 11:42 +, Derick Rethans wrote:
> Please, no top posting!
>
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> > On Sun, March 10, 2013 23:11, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > > On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 21:57 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wro
Please, no top posting!
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> On Sun, March 10, 2013 23:11, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 21:57 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> >>
> >>> I would agree in principle, but, as I explained before, t
libgmp was just the first shot as it has functions to convert from
arbitrary binary data to string and vice versa, mpz_import and mpz_export.
That's what should work fine across platforms. Looking at the type
definitions here
http://lxr.php.net/xref/PHP_5_5/ext/date/lib/timelib_structs.h#70 i
woul
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 21:57 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> > On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> > >
> > >> I've reworked the patch from
> > >> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/mi
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> >
> > > I've reworked the patch from
> > > http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> > > (mentioned by tony2001) for
Hi,
On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 21:57 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> >
> >> I've reworked the patch from
> >> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> >> (mentioned by
On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:36:41 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
I've reworked the patch from
http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
(mentioned by tony2001) for bug #63437, that seems to fix the issue.
That patch was ported back to
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Anatol Belski wrote:
> I've reworked the patch from
> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> (mentioned by tony2001) for bug #63437, that seems to fix the issue.
> That patch was ported back to 5.3 and adapted to the current 5.4+.
> Both variant
Sorry, the correct one is bug #53437 ...
On Tue, March 5, 2013 12:42, Anatol Belski wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I've reworked the patch from
> http://nebm.ist.utl.pt/~glopes/misc/date_period_interval_ser.diff
> (mentioned by tony2001) for bug #63437, that seems to fix the issue. That
> patch was ported bac
13 matches
Mail list logo
