Hi,
DIY, it's not hard. You need a semaphore (*nix) and shared memory . Semaphores
are not available on Windows but they are emulatable with ext/shmop.
More info can be found here :
http://hristov.com/andrey/projects/php_stuff/pres/writing_parallel_apps_with_PHP.pdf
sources :
http://hristov.com/a
Jani Taskinen wrote:
>
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
Include an opcode cache by default. A lot of work has gone into
pecl/apc recently, but I am not hung up on which one goes in.
In case we include APC by default, it would be nice if its apc_store(
Jani Taskinen schrieb:
> But I'd treat this kind of thing rather as part of session handling
> mechanism though. We had a short thread about this in the "wishlist"
> thread already so read that too.
Ah, now I remember. Anyways, just wanted to make sure that this does not
get forgotten ;-)
--
S
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Jani Taskinen schrieb:
Containing what? What about those "round-robin" environments where
you have several machines serving same web pages?
You're right, what we really need is being able to introduce new
super-globals through extensions (can we
Jani Taskinen schrieb:
> Containing what? What about those "round-robin" environments where
> you have several machines serving same web pages?
You're right, what we really need is being able to introduce new
super-globals through extensions (can we do this already?), so that the
extensions tha
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
Include an opcode cache by default. A lot of work has gone into
pecl/apc recently, but I am not hung up on which one goes in.
In case we include APC by default, it would be nice if its apc_store() /
apc_fetch() mechanism
Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:
> Include an opcode cache by default. A lot of work has gone into
> pecl/apc recently, but I am not hung up on which one goes in.
In case we include APC by default, it would be nice if its apc_store() /
apc_fetch() mechanism could be mapped to a new super-global, say
$_
You mean that preg_match() would match an ordinary string just fine? I
wouldn't prefer that for performance reasons. I'd like to choose per case
how I want the matching done (regexp or not).
Ron
"Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This one time, at ban
This one time, at band camp, "Ron Korving" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with this would be that it can't be decided on a per-case basis,
> but only for the whole switch, which would make the execution slower. That's
> why I'd prefer a "regcase", but I guess this can be considered ugly
Funny solution :) Not very elegant I think (no offence, coz it is a smart
one), but it works. It would be nice if the language provided it.. Another
problem though with my idea (and not your solution) would be that a
"regcase" would have the PHP syntax rely on an external library.
Ron
"James Cru
The problem with this would be that it can't be decided on a per-case basis,
but only for the whole switch, which would make the execution slower. That's
why I'd prefer a "regcase", but I guess this can be considered ugly becuase
e.g. C(++) doesn't have a "regcase" either and it's quite a diversion
Ron Korving wrote:
I have another idea I came up with today: regular expression switches, but
it would be difficult without adding to the syntax.
no, its actually pretty easy from a syntax point of view,
you don't need to add another keyword, just add an optional
callback parameter to switch()
Can be done already ... sorta.
switch (true) {
case ($str == 'abc'):
echo "it was ABC!\n";
break;
case (preg_match('/^[0-9]+$/i', $str)):
echo "it was a number!\n";
break;
default:
echo "it was
"Mike Bretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Also an useful feature would be "const" on function parameters.
Hmm, I like that ;) That may even provide a performance increasing
opportunity...
I have another idea I came up with today: regular expression switches, but
i
The wishlist on PHP6 has grown a lot last weeks. Here is what I have
missed so far:
switchable behaviours in php.ini file:
- enforced variable initialisation (throw E_ERROR where today E_NOTICE
is triggered)
- strict variable typing (This can be done with SetType already, but a
nicer language
Didn't say I thought it was going to happen, just that I rather take a
step "back" then a step "forward" if any movement at all was going to
happen.
John
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 17:15 -0400, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote:
> Let's please stop breaking things just because we find them
> aesthetica
> Let's please stop breaking things just because we find them
> aesthetically displeasing.
*hug*
> -adam
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Let's please stop breaking things just because we find them
aesthetically displeasing.
-adam
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, John Coggeshall wrote:
> So very -1 on anything introducing another way to print stuff. I am
> however +1 on turning off everything but
> John
>
> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 22:44 +0200,
John Coggeshall wrote:
So very -1 on anything introducing another way to print stuff. I am
however +1 on turning off everything but
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Wez,
we could however drop '<%' support and introduce '
You'll have to pry '<%' from my cold, dead hands :)
Edin
So very -1 on anything introducing another way to print stuff. I am
however +1 on turning off everything but Marcus Boerger wrote:
> > Hello Wez,
> >
> > we could however drop '<%' support and introduce '
> You'll have to pry '<%' from my cold, dead hands :)
>
> Edin
>
--
PHP Internals - P
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Wez,
>
> we could however drop '<%' support and introduce 'http://www.php.net/unsub.php
+1
"Marcus Boerger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hello Wez,
>
> we could however drop '<%' support and introduce ' Along with that we might even add an E_STRICT to protect against '
> regards
> marcus
>
> Wednesday, August 31, 2005, 7:04:27 PM, you wrote:
>
> > B
Hello Wez,
we could however drop '<%' support and introduce ' But that's not going to happen any time soon (if ever); far too many
> scripts use it.
> --Wez.
> On 8/31/05, John Coggeshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Removing the > like a much better idea to me then trying to expand upon it.
But that's not going to happen any time soon (if ever); far too many
scripts use it.
--Wez.
On 8/31/05, John Coggeshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Removing the like a much better idea to me then trying to expand upon it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 15:23 +0200, Ron Korvin
On 8/31/05, John Coggeshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Removing the like a much better idea to me then trying to expand upon it.
>
+1
Removing the Can't help it... ;) By the way, I thought all programmers were lazy to some
> extent?
>
> Seriously though, I think it would be nice and consistent if it would work.
> I just really like the short
> Ron
>
>
> "Joseph Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PR
Using seems ridiculous, because it would be implemented
only into current branches, so it would not bring compatibility with
older releases...
Moreover, instead of using for variable interpolation, I
prefer to use the heredoc syntax, I think it's better for good looking
and readable code.
F
Can't help it... ;) By the way, I thought all programmers were lazy to some
extent?
Seriously though, I think it would be nice and consistent if it would work.
I just really like the short wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why do you find the need to be lazy and use lol j/k
i always use
is much much better then because
it is shorter and gives a more readable code.
And I am
sure that more than a half of the PHP
programmers can confirm
that. becomes ve
Why do you find the need to be lazy and use lol j/k
i always use it may be only a few more chars of code but
it is guranteed to work on any php installation ;)
--
Joseph Crawford Jr.
Codebowl Solutions, Inc.
1-802-671-2021
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
But why doesn't work? If that'd work, I just might start using
Ron
"Rasmus Lerdorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Paul Reinheimer wrote:
> > My prefrerence would be for the interpreter to look for " > short tags is enabled (that was brace, question mark, white sp
Hi, David,
On Sunday 28 August 2005 10:18, David Kingma | jool.nl wrote:
> If you replace the te following lines:
>
> "("php"|"\"php\""|"\'php\'"){WHITESPACE}*">" { HANDLE_NEWLINES(yytext,
> yyleng);
> if (CG(short_tags) || yyleng>2) { /* yyleng>2 means it's not
Johannes Schlueter wrote:
Hi Sara,
On Sunday 28 August 2005 00:02, Sara Golemon wrote:
+"
And what's with or any other processing instruction? Even
so others than xml are rarely used it would imho be a great wtf factor if
At a sidenote: If you output xml you anyways neet to set t
Paul Reinheimer wrote:
> My prefrerence would be for the interpreter to look for " short tags is enabled (that was brace, question mark, white space), I
> don't think i've ever come across an instance when a space or line
> break wasn't used. I don't have a huge code repository handy but are
> ther
believe it's an issue.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Sara Golemon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 12:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 6.0 Wishlist
>
>
> > >> It would be nice if PHP could
: Sunday, August 28, 2005 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 6.0 Wishlist
> >> It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by " >> short_tags is on.
> >>
> > Already included, you may have seen this feature used before, >
> I gather he meant making
Hi Sara,
On Sunday 28 August 2005 00:02, Sara Golemon wrote:
> +" or any other processing instruction? Even
so others than xml are rarely used it would imho be a great wtf factor if
http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Let's just nuke all other opening tags than
It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by "
Already included, you may have seen this feature used before, I gather he meant making the scanner intelligent enough to see that the followed by 'xml' and just ignoring the fact that short open
It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by "
Already included, you may have seen this feature used before, I gather he meant making the scanner intelligent enough to see that the is followed by 'xml' and just ignoring the fact that short open tags is on.
I wouldn't expect to see it happe
Already included, you may have seen this feature used before, Hi:
>
> It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by " short_tags is on.
>
> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=25987
>
> --Dan
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net
Hi:
It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by "http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=25987
--Dan
--
T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y
data intensive web and database programming
http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/
4015 7th Ave
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Christian,
Thursday, August 25, 2005, 12:17:25 PM, you wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
I would see this as a optional addition to the syntax of interfaces...
i.e. everything works as before but you can add default function bodies
which would behave as if it was defined
Hello Christian,
Thursday, August 25, 2005, 12:17:25 PM, you wrote:
> Jochem Maas wrote:
>> I would see this as a optional addition to the syntax of interfaces...
>> i.e. everything works as before but you can add default function bodies
>> which would behave as if it was defined in each class th
Zeev Suraski wrote:
How is that different from multiple inheritance?
I guess the only difference is that interfaces don't strictly
fall into a hierarchy? also interfaces don't implement properties
or class constants which would simplify matters?
anyway I guess I have to read more on the subjec
Christian Schneider wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
I would see this as a optional addition to the syntax of interfaces...
i.e. everything works as before but you can add default function bodies
which would behave as if it was defined in each class that implements
the given interface.
if this is a t
How is that different from multiple inheritance?
Zeev
At 12:44 25/08/2005, Jochem Maas wrote:
in a totally non-academic and impure way I have always thought that it would
be nice to be able to define function bodies in interface declarations
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
Jochem Maas wrote:
I would see this as a optional addition to the syntax of interfaces...
i.e. everything works as before but you can add default function bodies
which would behave as if it was defined in each class that implements
the given interface.
if this is a truely evil concept I would ve
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Well $proxy would automagically support the interfaces of the aggregated
objects. And if there's a method you want to proxy to one rather the
other you could fine tune that. Anything more than that would be getting
into an OOP pissing contest which I don't feel like getting
JM>>I think I remember reading that PHP always evaluates expressions from right
JM>>to left, so I guess there may be a considerable codebase change required.
I personally don't see a point in "considerable codebase change" just for
the sake of syntactic prettyness. It doesn't add anything to the
if (2 < $x <= 4) {}
Doesn't this collide with its current meaning:
if ( (2 < $x) <= 4) {}
i.e. parsing left to right, the true/false result of 2 < $x, is compared
with <= 4.
Changing the meaning could break some programs.
Tex Texin
Internationalization Architect, Yahoo! Inc.
> -
Well $proxy would automagically support the interfaces of the
aggregated objects. And if there's a method you want to proxy to one
rather the other you could fine tune that. Anything more than that
would be getting into an OOP pissing contest which I don't feel like
getting into, as it would be
Hello Andi,
hu?
Here's you example again:
aggregate($obj2); /* Also aggregates interfaces */
$proxy->aggregate($obj3);
$proxy->delegate($obj3, "method_that_exists_in_both_objects");
?>
ok lets change this to an interface like in my example:
So what do you want to do about the fact that my d
Not if it's done they way I think it can be done...
At 03:17 PM 8/24/2005, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Andi,
you mean fine tune the 'protocol' to use the correct wording. It simply is
incompatible with the interface concept.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005, 11:48:33 PM, you wrote:
> I don't mi
Hello Andi,
you mean fine tune the 'protocol' to use the correct wording. It simply is
incompatible with the interface concept.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005, 11:48:33 PM, you wrote:
> I don't mind not adding it, as long as we don't add "delegate" :)
> Anyway, it's different from MI because it
I don't mind not adding it, as long as we don't add "delegate" :)
Anyway, it's different from MI because it allows you to fine tune the
interface...
Andi
At 12:01 PM 8/24/2005, Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Andi,
i said 'we could probably add'. But even though proxy/aggregation idea
like you
Hello Andi,
i said 'we could probably add'. But even though proxy/aggregation idea
like you offered and which i of course could implement in spl exists i
still see no reason for it. The problem with the latter is that it only
gives you back the original MI problems and doesn't work together with
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Again (I sound like a broken record), I don't think that we should add
> language constructs to support delegation. We will be overcomplicating
> things for PHP developers and it'll start to be hard to read PHP code.
> I do think it might be worth considering a user-land or in
Again (I sound like a broken record), I don't think that we should
add language constructs to support delegation. We will be
overcomplicating things for PHP developers and it'll start to be hard
to read PHP code.
I do think it might be worth considering a user-land or internal
class such as a P
Hello Zeev,
Tuesday, August 23, 2005, 8:59:49 PM, you wrote:
> At 19:12 23/08/2005, Lukas Smith wrote:
>>Joseph Crawford wrote:
>>>I would like to see Multiple Inheritance implemented in a future version.
>>>I am not sure what obstacles got in the way (if any) for not implementing
>>>that in PHP
At 19:12 23/08/2005, Lukas Smith wrote:
Joseph Crawford wrote:
I would like to see Multiple Inheritance implemented in a future version.
I am not sure what obstacles got in the way (if any) for not implementing
that in PHP 5 but i would defenately like to see that in PHP 6 or 7
IIRC, it was s
Joseph Crawford wrote:
I would like to see Multiple Inheritance implemented in a future version. I
am not sure what obstacles got in the way (if any) for not implementing that
in PHP 5 but i would defenately like to see that in PHP 6 or 7
IIRC, it was shot down. Use overloading and interfaces
Joseph Crawford wrote:
> I would like to see Multiple Inheritance implemented in a future version. I
> am not sure what obstacles got in the way (if any) for not implementing that
> in PHP 5 but i would defenately like to see that in PHP 6 or 7
And if we had implemented MI, that would probably g
I would like to see Multiple Inheritance implemented in a future version. I
am not sure what obstacles got in the way (if any) for not implementing that
in PHP 5 but i would defenately like to see that in PHP 6 or 7
--
Joseph Crawford Jr.
Codebowl Solutions, Inc.
1-802-671-2021
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Aug 12, 2005, at 1:48 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
4. Include an opcode cache by default. A lot of work has gone into
pecl/apc recently, but I am not hung up on which one goes in.
This is a sweet carrot to drive adoption despite a few minor BC issues.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Devel
Yes!
I have struggled with bundling PEAR in PHP's Windows distro for quite
some time, and hopefully this will make my life easier too :)
Edin
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
To echo Andi's comments on php-src, this should definitely make the
release process much easier as well as help encourage peo
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
Shmop does just that, it takes a string of data (any data) and puts it
in memory. Serialization is something sysvshm extension does.
Ilia
shmop is the solution if you want to store only strings but once you want
to store arrays or objects then the ser/deser is needed.
At 00:26 16/08/2005, Pasha Zubkov wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Finally, the main issue I'm going against is the 'we can now break
> things!' approach. I don't have a problem with all of the points Rasmus
> made, just some of them. And the biggest problem is the mindset of the
> thread that foll
To echo Andi's comments on php-src, this should definitely make the
release process much easier as well as help encourage people to upgrade
their PEAR stuff more frequently.
A big thanks to Pierre and Jani for getting this done.
Ilia
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To un
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Finally, the main issue I'm going against is the 'we can now break
> things!' approach. I don't have a problem with all of the points Rasmus
> made, just some of them. And the biggest problem is the mindset of the
> thread that followed it.
>
> Zeev
How long PHP must take
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> 9. Radically change all the operator syntaxes. Oh wait, that's Perl
> 6.0, sorry.
In the same spirit, on my PHP 7.0 wishlist are Unicode operators. :)
-adam
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.trachtenberg.com
author of o'reilly's "upgrading to
Hello David,
nice constructive helpfull work, thanks!
best regardws
marcus
Monday, August 15, 2005, 8:49:35 PM, you wrote:
> As a decreasingly "hardcore" php user, any and/or all items on Rasmus'
> wishlist would be welcome. However, to comment on two items
> The strpos/in_array argument
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:52 PM, sebastian wrote:
W4: Better lambda/anonymous functions and debugging for them.
Consider Perl's anonymous functions which disappear as the
references to them disappear. See the create_function() docs for
notes about "memory leaks."
Well, Perl subroutines are
Howdy all,
I work at a company with about 8 programmers, and after some discussion
we decided the following would be nice to add to the language:
W1: Type hints. It'd be nice if you could mark a variable as string or
int, so that if we set an int to "foozle" a warning will be raised. Of
cour
As a decreasingly "hardcore" php user, any and/or all items on Rasmus'
wishlist would be welcome. However, to comment on two items
The strpos/in_array argument swap is one of my greatest joys in PHP. It
keeps it lively. So I did a quick grep of the manual for "needle/haystack"
type functions,
At 19:16 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Marc Richards wrote:
> I read a bunch of other mailing-lists on a daily basis using Gmane that
> I don't actually send replies to. I am not necessarily trying to refute
> your point, just saying that there may be things you hadn't considered.
You don't
At 19:09 15/08/2005, Marc Richards wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developer
At 18:55 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:52 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's exactly what I was saying (in another part of the email).
It doesn't work in reverse order though - being on one of these
lists does usually mean that the developer is more 'hardcore' than
Marc Richards wrote:
> I read a bunch of other mailing-lists on a daily basis using Gmane that
> I don't actually send replies to. I am not necessarily trying to refute
> your point, just saying that there may be things you hadn't considered.
You don't need to subscribe to post. The first time y
Marc Richards wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually g
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> w
x27;t need to ask questions. Makes sense?
- David
> -Original Message-
> From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 5:53 PM
> To: George Schlossnagle
> Cc: George Schlossnagle; Jochem Maas; internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Wez Furlong wrote:
> On 8/15/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Where does using case sensitive identifiers fall?
>
> As something of a dream, without the additional infrastructure that
> George described.
>
> Personally, I don't really mind if we get case sensi
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:52 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's exactly what I was saying (in another part of the email).
It doesn't work in reverse order though - being on one of these
lists does usually mean that the developer is more 'hardcore' than
others.
Have you seen Harold and Kumar G
George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
If apc comes bundled then it includes apc_store() and apc_fetch
At 18:50 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> wrong - it's 99.84%, not
At 18:45 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening nu
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> (*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
> estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
> 500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
> wrong - it's 99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
Not sure where you get your n
On Aug 15, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between
500,000 to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number
wrong - it's 99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
(*) Based on the fact php-general@ has 787 subscribers and current
estimates at the amount of PHP developers worldwide range between 500,000
to 2,000,000 developers. I actually got the opening number wrong - it's
99.84%, not 98.5%. Sorry.
Zeev
At 18:29 15/08/2005, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Joch
On 8/15/05, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where does using case sensitive identifiers fall?
As something of a dream, without the additional infrastructure that
George described.
Personally, I don't really mind if we get case sensitivity or not; the
other items on Rasmus' list all seem
Jochem,
Even though you position yourself as a 'mere mortal' developer, you happen
to be subscribed on [EMAIL PROTECTED] That alone makes you much more 'hardcore
PHPer' than 98.5% to 99.96% of the PHP developer community (*). You're
much closer to the 'elitist oligarchy' than to the masses.
loose comments, by no means aimed at Sara (who I happen to hold in high
regard for not only here coding skills but also here general manner)
Sara Golemon wrote:
You and the rest of the people on internals@ are not the masses nor do
they represent them in any way. When a 'non-contributor' dares
On Aug 15, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
I agree that ensuring a migration
path is critical. Wez and I were discussing this in the car this
morning, and short of magic_quoutes_runtime, they all seemed like
they were straightforward to handle through am include (except for
the paramete
You and the rest of the people on internals@ are not the masses nor do
they represent them in any way. When a 'non-contributor' dares to voice
an opinion, he's shut up because he's, well, a non-contributor. He's the
one that matters, though, not you.
PHP doesn't need to be a true-democracy (
At 16:36 15/08/2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 15, 2005, at 5:05 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's an excellent response. If one percent of the energy put
into the 'yay parade' and the 'let's break this too!' parade were
invested in coming up with a clean upgrade path, I wouldn't have
ha
At 16:47 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> > I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
>>
>> http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
>>
>> In a reply directly to you. You even
On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, George Schlossnagle wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
If apc comes bundled then it includes apc_store() and apc_fetch
() this
is pretty much $_MEM
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
>> Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> > I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
>>
>> http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
>>
>> In a reply directly to you. You even replied to it and quoted from it.
>
> Emm y
At 16:30 15/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> I read the whole thread and didn't see it being mentioned even once.
http://news.php.net/php.internals/18063
In a reply directly to you. You even replied to it and quoted from it.
Emm yes, before I wrote my first reply, of cour
On Aug 15, 2005, at 5:05 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
That's an excellent response. If one percent of the energy put
into the 'yay parade' and the 'let's break this too!' parade were
invested in coming up with a clean upgrade path, I wouldn't have
had to write the response I wrote.
Would i
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
