It's not deprecated. However, in general it usually doesn't make sense to
use it for objects anymore.
Andi
At 01:26 AM 3/4/2004 +0100, Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
Hello,
I'm wondering if this syntax is deprecated or not:
function &f() {
return $foo;
}
$h = &f();
ideas?
pierre
--
PHP Int
> Something like array_keys(get_class_vars($classname)) or
> array_keys(get_object_vars($object)) ?
:) sure, but what i want to get is reading variable names without copying
values. let`s say i have object with 2MB of text in it - using
get_class[object]_vars would copy whole text to temporary ar
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Robert Janeczek wrote:
> > Something like array_keys(get_class_vars($classname)) or
> > array_keys(get_object_vars($object)) ?
>
> :) sure, but what i want to get is reading variable names without copying
> values. let`s say i have object with 2MB of text in it - using
> get_c
At 09:20 AM 2/27/2004 +0100, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, John Coggeshall wrote:
>
> $reflect = new Reflection_Class("Object");
>
> $docs = $reflect->getDocComment();
> if(!empty($docs)) {
> echo "Has Docs.\n";
> }
>
> if(!empty($reflect->getDocComment())
Hey,
The reason for this behavior is that in PHP 3 and 4, objects were treated
very much like arrays (this is the main reason for redesigning the object
model for PHP 5).
I don't think that the old behavior is correct and an empty should always
return true (i.e. empty($var) should return true i
I want to contribute towards PHP code( Internals)
I want to take it up along with my studies.
I am doing graduates degree in computer Science
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> hi,
>
> I'am a little astonished concerning the modify function parameter order.
> mysqli_query ( object link, string query [, int resultmode]) for example
> expect the object link after the sql query. in the old ext/mysql it is
> completly reversed. I think this is bad for a possible migration
Hey folks,
quoting from ilias mail from 25th january:
---
Thus, I am announcing the RC2 release
that will be made avaliable on Friday 30th (January, not March :) ), which if
proves to be problem free will be released as 4.3.5 final on February 9th.
---
Ok, there has been an RC3 which wasn't pla
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Thomas Seifert wrote:
> quoting from ilias mail from 25th january:
> ---
> Thus, I am announcing the RC2 release
> that will be made avaliable on Friday 30th (January, not March :) ), which if
> proves to be problem free will be released as 4.3.5 final on February 9th.
> ---
>
