On Thu, 27 May 2004, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2004, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > Nah, I know. I'm not saying I'm against it, all I'm saying is that noone
> > will hear any objections from me. It puts an extra tool in the hands of the
> > user at negligible cost and that's a good thing.
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Bert Slagter wrote:
> You can't handle all errorlevels with a custom error handler, at the
> moment E_STRICT (why this one by the way?), E_ERROR, E_PARSE,
> E_CORE_ERROR, E_CORE_WARNING, E_COMPILE_ERROR and E_COMPILE_WARNING
> cannot be handled. So I can understand that one de
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Bert Slagter wrote:
> E_STRICT can not be handled you say, can you give a small example script
on that?
regards,
Derick
Of course :)
---
foo = 0;
class Foo
{ var $baz;
function bar()
{
}
}
class Foo2 extends
Bert Slagter wrote:
Now I add a custom errorhandler:
---
function myErrorHandler($errno, $errstr, $errfile, $errline)
{print "We've got a $errno on line $errline in $errfile!";
}
set_error_handler('myErrorHandler');
error_reporting(0);
Hm, i tried manually setting the second para
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Bert Slagter wrote:
> Is this by design?
No, it's fixed in CVS now.
regards,
Derick
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Sara Golemon wrote:
> We don't necessarily *have* to. Unless people are explicitly returning a
> false value (as opposed to simply not using return) we can make the
> distinction. Recall that not returning anything is passed as a return
> value
> of NULL. So we could say "If NULL, don't invoke
So a "plain" _XOPEN_SOURCE works on fbsd?
--Wez.
> -Original Message-
> From: Curt Zirzow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28 May 2004 05:51
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RC3RC1
>
> * Thus wrote Curt Zirzow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I tracked it down that it broke fo
These are all needed in different combinations on different systems.
Don't you just love standards!?
--Wez.
> > #define __EXTENSIONS__
> > #define _ALL_SOURCE
> > #include
> >
> Yep, those defines are there, but If I add
>
> #define __BSD_VISIBLE 1
>
> It works.
>
>
> I tracked it down th
Could you please take a look in your system headers to see where "uint" gets
defined. It will be guarded by an #ifdef; in order to correct this problem
without breaking the build for other platforms, we need to know what causes
that thing to get defined.
--Wez.
> -Original Message-
> Fr
That was already reverted 5 weeks ago in CVS:
http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php-src/main/network.c?r1=1.83.2.23&r2=1.83.2.24&t
y=u
--Wez.
> It hangs in main/network.c the change introduced from 1.83.2.20 to
> 1.83.2.21 in the select shown here if no data can be read (yet). This
> doesn't mean th
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 11:16:51AM +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:
> These are all needed in different combinations on different systems.
> Don't you just love standards!?
Mmm.. And the standard on Irix is
#define _BSD_COMPAT
/ Daniel Fahlgren
--
I live the way I type; fast, with a lot of mistakes
D
Thanks!
Can you check if there is a guard for the grantpt function too?
--Wez.
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Fahlgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28 May 2004 12:39
> To: Wez Furlong
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RC3RC1
>
> On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 11:16:5
If you are talking about the libxml_set_streams_context, the php streams are
registered by default so that function is not even used unless explicitly
called to use a specific stream. I also dont see how that patch could work
as in the request shutdown, it calls xmlRegisterDefaultInputCallbacks whi
Does IRIX also have grantpt() ?
If so, what defines are needed to switch it on?
--Wez.
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Fahlgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28 May 2004 12:39
> To: Wez Furlong
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RC3RC1
>
> On Fri, May 28, 2004 at
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Wez Furlong wrote:
> These are all needed in different combinations on different systems.
> Don't you just love standards!?
It is extremely unwise to play with these flags, because
there is nothing portable about them. Getting it right and
making it work everywhe
A problem with that is that our php_config.h will unconditionally include
various system headers, not allowing an individual source file to set more
flags.
This is a problem, for example, on Solaris where defining the correct symbols
to get Unix98 and the uint type working in turn causes stdio.h t
Hello
> Can you check if there is a guard for the grantpt function too?
As long as you don't give the "-ansi" option to gcc it compiles without
warning. All it needs it stdlib.h
/ Daniel Fahlgren
--
I live the way I type; fast, with a lot of mistakes
Daniel Fahlgren http://www.acc
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 01:25:36PM +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:
> Does IRIX also have grantpt() ?
Yes.
> If so, what defines are needed to switch it on?
Nothing but to include stdlib.h
/ Daniel Fahlgren
--
I live the way I type; fast, with a lot of mistakes
Daniel Fahlgren http://ww
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Wez Furlong wrote:
> A problem with that is that our php_config.h will unconditionally include
> various system headers, not allowing an individual source file to set more
> flags.
You can tell PHP_ADD_SOURCES to use special compile flags for
a specific compilation un
Thanks; sorry for mailing twice, I got interrupted and forgot that I had
already asked you the question.
Could you please test HEAD (or the next snapshot); I've updated it to what
will hopefully be the final incarnation of proc_open.c for PHP 5.0.0
--Wez.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan
* Thus wrote Wez Furlong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Thanks; sorry for mailing twice, I got interrupted and forgot that I had
> already asked you the question.
>
> Could you please test HEAD (or the next snapshot); I've updated it to what
> will hopefully be the final incarnation of proc_open.c for PHP
Wez Furlong wrote:
That was already reverted 5 weeks ago in CVS:
http://cvs.php.net/diff.php/php-src/main/network.c?r1=1.83.2.23&r2=1.83.2.24&t
y=u
Oops, I checked release versions instead of the CVS, my apologies.
- Chris
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visi
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 02:29:38PM +0100, Wez Furlong wrote:
> Thanks; sorry for mailing twice, I got interrupted and forgot that I had
> already asked you the question.
>
> Could you please test HEAD (or the next snapshot); I've updated it to what
> will hopefully be the final incarnation of proc
Is it possible to know wether a function is being called from a php context
or not?
If so, a check could be done in php_libxml_streams_IO_match_wrapper which if
not under the php context, it would return 0 thus making the php registered
streams useless for other applications.
I also got a reponse
Hi all,
is there a specific reason why nested blocks in switch statements are
not supported ? It can be very useful if you want to jump into the
middle of the first iteration of a loop (like fetching rows from a
result set where the first row might or might not be already present)
Eg.
switch ($
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Rob Richards wrote:
> Is it possible to know wether a function is being called from a php context
> or not?
I am not sure how. We know if we are in the middle of parsing a PHP
script, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the libxml call is from a
PHP context. We could be c
From: "Rasmus Lerdorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am not sure how. We know if we are in the middle of parsing a PHP
> script, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the libxml call is from a
> PHP context. We could be calling some 3rd-party library that knows
> nothing about PHP that happens to use
Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
Hi all,
is there a specific reason why nested blocks in switch statements are
not supported ? It can be very useful if you want to jump into the
middle of the first iteration of a loop (like fetching rows from a
result set where the first row might or might not be already p
Ilya Sher wrote:
It looks like using "goto" to me. Messy.
That's probably the reason it is not allowed.
Or maybe other people like myself failed to
understand how it is really useful. Real example
from you would help here.
it's a valid performance trick in C
http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/d/Duffs
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote:
Ilya Sher wrote:
It looks like using "goto" to me. Messy.
That's probably the reason it is not allowed.
Or maybe other people like myself failed to
understand how it is really useful. Real example
from you would help here.
it's a valid performance trick in C
Thanks for th
30 matches
Mail list logo
