Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Lukas, Monday, May 15, 2006, 8:43:41 AM, you wrote: > Derick Rethans wrote: >> On Sun, 14 May 2006, Marcus Boerger wrote: >> >>> That said i am about to not remove E_STRICT from E_ALL and MFH the php >>> 6.0 to item just now. >>> See: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP60 (add E_STRICT to E_A

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Pierre, Monday, May 15, 2006, 2:39:02 AM, you wrote: > On Sun, 14 May 2006 20:59:03 +0200 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Boerger) wrote: >> That said i am about to not remove E_STRICT from E_ALL and MFH the php >> 6.0 to item just now. >> See: http://oss.backendmedia.com/PhP60 (add E_STRICT

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Lukas Smith
Marcus Boerger wrote: Sorry i have to say that but PEAR is no argument here as still after years of PHP 5 there is no PHP 5 compatible PEAR. Yet we are discussing a PHP 5 version here. PEAR is PHP5 compatible. But you probably meant E_STRICT compatible. Yes, I agree that PEAR needs to become

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Ron Korving
Wouldn't it be nice to start a PEAR2 (or 5) then, with PHP5-ready code, where PHP5 features will actually be used and backwards compatibility for PHP4 is lacking. The current PEAR could gradually be ported into this, and PHP4-users can continue to use PEAR (version 1, if you will). Ron "Lukas

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Lukas Smith
Ron Korving wrote: Wouldn't it be nice to start a PEAR2 (or 5) then, with PHP5-ready code, where PHP5 features will actually be used and backwards compatibility for PHP4 is lacking. The current PEAR could gradually be ported into this, and PHP4-users can continue to use PEAR (version 1, if you

RE: [PHP-DEV] Status of FastCGI in 5.1.4

2006-05-15 Thread Dmitry Stogov
Hi Edin, Most bugs were fixed before 5.1.4 release. I tested PHP with isapi_fcgi.dll, mod_fastcgi and zend_enabler. Seems all work fine, but I cannot be sure that it works in all cases. Thanks. Dmitry. > -Original Message- > From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturd

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Pierre
On 5/15/06, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sorry i have to say that but PEAR is no argument here as still after years of PHP 5 there is no PHP 5 compatible PEAR. Yet we are discussing a PHP 5 version here. This is a pointless argument. First there is php5 only packages. Second you

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Greg Beaver
Steph Fox wrote: > Marcus, > > FWIW I'm with you (unusually) over E_STRICT. Why would anyone have E_ALL > switched on anywhere but a dev box? - and when there is the option to > switch on E_ALL without E_STRICT, it makes it much easier to miss > useful information about the direction PHP is going

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
My opinion is that if we intend to make something stop working (give fatal error) in future releases we need to provide some form of notice be it E_STRICT or E_NOTICE to our users now, so they can anticipate the change. As far as inclusion of E_STRICT into E_ALL, I think this is a good idea

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Derick Rethans
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > My opinion is that if we intend to make something stop working (give fatal > error) in future releases we need to provide some form of notice be it > E_STRICT or E_NOTICE to our users now, so they can anticipate the change. As > far as inclusion of E_

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
I suggest that we add E_STRICT now, but not include E_STRICT into E_ALL, so people who are not using E_STRICT error reporting level don't have their applications start spewing strict messages. We cannot force people to change their code, all we can reasonably do is provide notification mechan

[PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Hello, okay, mistakes happen everyday but it really sucks that PHP.net continues trying to hide mistakes. 1) PHP 5.1.4 was released with a nonsense announcement claiming that there was only a problem with POST arrays or POST fileuploads. -> In reality a paid Zend developer had destroyed the h

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
Why would anyone have E_ALL switched on anywhere but a dev box? Working with Phorum, I get to peer into lots of different hosting companies setups when helping my users. I have seen many hosts that do have E_ALL enabled and do not log errors because they have no way to provide that log back

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
On 15-May-06, at 9:39 AM, Stefan Esser wrote: Hello, okay, mistakes happen everyday but it really sucks that PHP.net continues trying to hide mistakes. 1) PHP 5.1.4 was released with a nonsense announcement claiming that there was only a problem with POST arrays or POST fileuploads. -> In

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Hey, > > The code in the release did not change on bit, the only change was the > inclusion of the missing phar file, this hardly warrants 5.1.5 or even > 5.1.4pl1. This will have no impact of people who have already > downloaded and installed PHP, nor will this impact people who have yet > to down

[PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Todd Ruth
On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 06:51 -0400, Greg Beaver wrote: ... > Side note: calling functions statically that do not have a static > modifier causes E_STRICT. Hello PEAR::isError() > > This is of course going to be a fatal in PHP 6, but it is now the most > common E_STRICT I see in PHP4-based code. Y

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > The code in the release did not change on bit, the only change was the > inclusion of the missing phar file, this hardly warrants 5.1.5 or even > 5.1.4pl1. This will have no impact of people who have already downloaded > and installed PHP, nor will this impact people who h

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Steph Fox
Stefan, Ironically after that incident another Zend man came forward and dares to say "I don't trust our core testers anymore" He dared to say it because there's a QA mechanism in place that isn't working - AKA a bunch of application developers testing Release Candidates on their real-world

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Andi Gutmans
Stefan, I don't see why this attack is directed at Zend people working on PHP, where the release process is completely a community driven effort (and last time I checked, no enterprise was involved in that process either). I agree the release process isn't perfect yet, and it becomes increasi

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
On 15-May-06, at 11:50 AM, Stefan Esser wrote: Hey, The code in the release did not change on bit, the only change was the inclusion of the missing phar file, this hardly warrants 5.1.5 or even 5.1.4pl1. This will have no impact of people who have already downloaded and installed PHP, no

[PHP-DEV] xmlwriter_write_raw() not in 5.1.4 yet?

2006-05-15 Thread D. Dante Lorenso
I'm on the latest and greatest PHP 5.1.4. I can see the function I think I want in the manual: http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.xmlwriter-write-raw.php But the manual says it's only in CVS. I confirmed that I don't have it: * Fatal error: Call to undefined function xmlwriter_write_

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Hello Andi, > I don't see why this attack is directed at Zend people working on PHP, > where the release process is completely a community driven effort (and > last time I checked, no enterprise was involved in that process either). Well I don't see why Zend people commit code that obviously broke

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Steph Fox
Why would anyone have E_ALL switched on anywhere but a dev box? Working with Phorum, I get to peer into lots of different hosting companies setups when helping my users. I have seen many hosts that do have E_ALL enabled and do not log errors because they have no way to provide that log back

RE: [PHP-DEV] xmlwriter_write_raw() not in 5.1.4 yet?

2006-05-15 Thread Jared Williams
> > I'm on the latest and greatest PHP 5.1.4. I can see the > function I think I want in the manual: > >http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.xmlwriter-write-raw.php > > But the manual says it's only in CVS. I confirmed that I > don't have it: > > * Fatal error: Call to undefined

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
I find it hard to believe that anyone involved - host or user - isn't aware that E_STRICT is on its way. Honestly, I only heard about it in the last few weeks. And I run an open source project based on PHP. I do PHP for a living. The average web host and/or webmaster does not keep up with t

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Andi Gutmans
At 09:32 AM 5/15/2006, Stefan Esser wrote: Hello Andi, > I don't see why this attack is directed at Zend people working on PHP, > where the release process is completely a community driven effort (and > last time I checked, no enterprise was involved in that process either). Well I don't see why

RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Dmitry Stogov
> -Original Message- > From: Stefan Esser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:32 PM > To: Andi Gutmans > Cc: PHP internals > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks > > > Hello Andi, > > I don't see why this attack is directed at Zend people > working on PH

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Hey Andi > My point was that this has nothing to do with Zend or not Zend. My point is not that someone from Zend broke it, but that someone from Zend blamed the community that THEY failed to find the problem. I thought Zend is enough into PHP to test their own products against RC's, too. It makes

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Hello Dmitry, > It was my bug. > I am writing a lot of code for PHP and as result do some bugs. > I don't know a man who never does bugs. > Exactly. I (we) appreciate your work and the point was not that you broke it. Like I replied to Andi, I also broke unserialize() in one of the 4.3 releases

Re: [PHP-DEV] xmlwriter_write_raw() not in 5.1.4 yet?

2006-05-15 Thread D. Dante Lorenso
Jared Williams wrote: http://us3.php.net/manual/en/function.xmlwriter-write-raw.php Anyone know the status of this function, if it does what I want, and what version I can start using it? I originally requested it. http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=6267 . I think it'll appear in 5.2, http:/

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Antony Dovgal
On 15.05.2006 21:10, Stefan Esser wrote: Hey Andi My point was that this has nothing to do with Zend or not Zend. My point is not that someone from Zend broke it, but that someone from Zend blamed the community that THEY failed to find the problem. I thought Zend is enough into PHP to test thei

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Antony Dovgal
On 15.05.2006 21:17, Stefan Esser wrote: Hello Dmitry, It was my bug. I am writing a lot of code for PHP and as result do some bugs. I don't know a man who never does bugs. Exactly. I (we) appreciate your work and the point was not that you broke it. Like I replied to Andi, I also broke unse

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
I agree with Andi on that (surprise surprise :) What does that give you that class constants don't? Zeev At 18:34 12/05/2006, Andi Gutmans wrote: I can see where it could come in handy but I honestly think it'd be bloat. We have to relax with the OO features because the increased code size h

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
Strike that, I was smoking something strong :) Class constants are not really relevant for this use case. At 20:57 15/05/2006, Zeev Suraski wrote: I agree with Andi on that (surprise surprise :) What does that give you that class constants don't? Zeev At 18:34 12/05/2006, Andi Gutmans wrot

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Antony Dovgal wrote: > So it makes me a bit angry when someone who did nothing (except for a > couple of mails to internals@) for PHP since December starts treating me > and Dmitry (who's one of the most active PHP contributors) like a > millionaires who earned their millions from poor PHP communit

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
> So it makes me a bit angry when someone who did nothing (except for a > couple of mails to internals@) for PHP since December starts treating > me and Dmitry (who's one of the most active PHP contributors) like a > millionaires who earned their millions from poor PHP community. Tony, you have ob

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
I have to say that in second thought (after realizing what you really meant) it sounds like a very useful feature. The main thing that worries me is the complexity to the end user, which is already in a pretty bad shape as it is today, and many people here care very little about it, because th

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Sebastian Bergmann wrote: > Now this is an unfair argument as Stefan cannot (for whatever reasons) > commit his work to cvs.php.net. Strike that, I was educated about this on IRC just now. My initial point is still valid to some degree, IMHO: just because Stefan's work does not go into cvs.php.

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
Stefan, If anything, that was a good drill on why it's not a good idea to write sarcastic, negative emails to people. Unless of course, your aim is to annoy them into starting a heated threads. You've raised some good points in your original email, and it's a shame you diluted your message

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Steph Fox
Sebastian Bergmann wrote: Now this is an unfair argument as Stefan cannot (for whatever reasons) commit his work to cvs.php.net. Strike that, I was educated about this on IRC just now. My initial point is still valid to some degree, IMHO: just because Stefan's work does not go into cvs.php.net

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Brian, Monday, May 15, 2006, 6:40:58 PM, you wrote: >> I find it hard to believe that anyone >> involved - host or user - isn't aware that E_STRICT is on its way. > Honestly, I only heard about it in the last few weeks. And I run an > open source project based on PHP. I do PHP for a li

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Todd, Monday, May 15, 2006, 6:03:14 PM, you wrote: > On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 06:51 -0400, Greg Beaver wrote: > ... >> Side note: calling functions statically that do not have a static >> modifier causes E_STRICT. Hello PEAR::isError() >> >> This is of course going to be a fatal in PHP 6, bu

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Stefan Esser
Zeev, > Instead of discussing the points, we're discussing these pointless > topics of who contributes more. I suggest we stop here, I think it's > absurd to question the level of contribution from any of you three. You are right. The discussion can stop here. Antony once again proved every single

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Ilia, Monday, May 15, 2006, 3:23:18 PM, you wrote: > I suggest that we add E_STRICT now, but not include E_STRICT into > E_ALL, We added E_STRICT in what 5.0 or or 5.1? Guess i checked it: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/src/php-cvs $ cvs annotate Zend/zend_errors.h|grep E_STRICT Annotations fo

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Greg, Monday, May 15, 2006, 12:51:16 PM, you wrote: > Steph Fox wrote: >> Marcus, >> >> FWIW I'm with you (unusually) over E_STRICT. Why would anyone have E_ALL >> switched on anywhere but a dev box? - and when there is the option to >> switch on E_ALL without E_STRICT, it makes it much e

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Stefan, Monday, May 15, 2006, 6:32:25 PM, you wrote: > Hello Andi, >> I don't see why this attack is directed at Zend people working on PHP, >> where the release process is completely a community driven effort (and >> last time I checked, no enterprise was involved in that process either).

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Steph Fox
Ones again E_ALL is for development. For example to move PEAR code to PHP 5. It is not for running legacy apps. IF you guys want i'd be ok with adding a new mode say "E_RUN"... You think that - I think that. After Brian Moon's response I went and checked what the INI files distributed with P

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
Steph Fox wrote: ini-dist is set at E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE ini-recommended is set at E_ALL I'd guess that's why Brian reports seeing E_ALL enabled on web hosts; they're advised to use the settings in ini-recommended, after all. Perhaps there should be an ini-development and an ini-production. --

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Hannes Magnusson
On 5/14/06, Steph Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ones again E_ALL is for development. For example to move PEAR code to PHP > 5. > It is not for running legacy apps. IF you guys want i'd be ok with adding > a > new mode say "E_RUN"... You think that - I think that. After Brian Moon's response

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Brian, yeah we should simply rename the two files we have right now to that. I never knew which one to take since their names are not helpful. In production we would set something like E_ALL & ~E_STRICT & ~E_NOTICE. While in development we would do E_ALL as in all. Nice idea! best regard

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Markus Fischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marcus Burger wrote: > Ones again E_ALL is for development. Is this the statement of all developers or only yours? I have to enable E_ALL on live servers (display_errors to 0), because whatever resource you have at your hand, you just can't make sure

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
Marcus Boerger wrote: Hello Brian, yeah we should simply rename the two files we have right now to that. I never knew which one to take since their names are not helpful. In production we would set something like E_ALL & ~E_STRICT & ~E_NOTICE. While in development we would do E_ALL as in all.

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Markus, Monday, May 15, 2006, 9:04:20 PM, you wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > Marcus Burger wrote: >> Ones again E_ALL is for development. > Is this the statement of all developers or only yours? Probably mine, I mean i can only speak for myself here. > I have

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Zeev Suraski
At 21:29 15/05/2006, Stefan Esser wrote: Zeev, > Instead of discussing the points, we're discussing these pointless > topics of who contributes more. I suggest we stop here, I think it's > absurd to question the level of contribution from any of you three. You are right. The discussion can stop

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Todd Ruth
On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 20:27 +0200, Marcus Boerger wrote: > Monday, May 15, 2006, 6:03:14 PM, you wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 06:51 -0400, Greg Beaver wrote: > > ... > >> Side note: calling functions statically that do not have a static > >> modifier causes E_STRICT. Hello PEAR::isError() > >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Nuno Lopes
Sorry for the delay. But I think that a new type specifier could be introduced. If not you are saying to extensions writers to duplicate the code below a hundred times: if (zend_parse_parameters(ZEND_NUM_ARGS() TSRMLS_CC, "t", &name, &name_len, &name_type) == FAILURE) { return; } if (name

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Todd, Monday, May 15, 2006, 9:32:21 PM, you wrote: > On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 20:27 +0200, Marcus Boerger wrote: >> Monday, May 15, 2006, 6:03:14 PM, you wrote: >> > On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 06:51 -0400, Greg Beaver wrote: >> > ... >> >> Side note: calling functions statically that do not have a

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Edin Kadribasic
Todd Ruth wrote: I don't see benefits of making semi-static fatal that make it worth keeping those of us with large apps that depend on semi- static from upgrading to php6. My sentiments exactly. OO purity/strictness do now work well with PHP's main strength -- its dynamicity. Edin -- PHP I

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Edin Kadribasic wrote: > OO purity/strictness do now work well with PHP's main strength -- its > dynamicity. You make it sound like OO and dynamicity were mutually exclusive; they are not. Take a look at Smalltalk or CLOS to see what I mean. -- Sebastian Bergmann http://ww

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Edin Kadribasic
Sebastian Bergmann wrote: Edin Kadribasic wrote: OO purity/strictness do now work well with PHP's main strength -- its dynamicity. You make it sound like OO and dynamicity were mutually exclusive; they are not. Take a look at Smalltalk or CLOS to see what I mean. I know, but often the ar

Re: [PHP-DEV] Status of FastCGI in 5.1.4

2006-05-15 Thread Wez Furlong
One of our customers reports that 5.1.4 fastcgi does not work, but that 5.2 does. It sounds like this needs to be addressed and a 5.1.5 released quickly. --Wez. On 5/15/06, Dmitry Stogov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Edin, Most bugs were fixed before 5.1.4 release. I tested PHP with isapi_fcgi

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Hartmut Holzgraefe
Zeev Suraski wrote: What does that give you that class constants don't? i on the other hand fail to see how it is related to class constants at all? -- Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Support Engineer. MySQL AB, www.mysql.com Are you certified? http://www.mysql.com/tra

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Jasper Bryant-Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Steph Fox wrote: >> Ones again E_ALL is for development. For example to move PEAR code to >> PHP 5. >> It is not for running legacy apps. IF you guys want i'd be ok with >> adding a >> new mode say "E_RUN"... > > You think that - I think that. A

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Andrei Zmievski
That assumes there are a hundred places where you want to receive an ASCII string. Are they really that prevalent? -Andrei On May 15, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote: Sorry for the delay. But I think that a new type specifier could be introduced. If not you are saying to extensions write

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 9:41 am, Brian Moon wrote: >> Why would anyone have E_ALL >> switched on anywhere but a dev box? > > Working with Phorum, I get to peer into lots of different hosting > companies setups when helping my users. I have seen many hosts that > do > have E_ALL enabled and do not log

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Jasper Bryant-Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Zeev Suraski wrote: > I have to say that in second thought (after realizing what you really > meant) it sounds like a very useful feature. [snip] > In order to push complexity down I'd avoid making this yet another > modifier, and in fact make thi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Nuno Lopes
Looking only to the tidy extension: tidy_parse_string tidy_parse_file tidy_repair_string tidy_repair_file tidy_getopt tidy::__constructor tidy::parseFile tidy::parseString I would say that others extensions will need too. Think in charset names, options names, options values, etc.. Nuno That

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
A quick Google for common PHP error messages will almost for sure find you a zillion sites with E_ALL in production servers. 2.1 million in fact. http://www.google.com/search?q=notice+undefined+php -- Brian Moon - http://dealnews.com/ Its good to be cheap =) -- PHP Internals - PH

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Andrei Zmievski
Are you sure want to generate a hard error if tidy_parse_string() doesn't get an ASCII string? -Andrei On May 15, 2006, at 2:30 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote: Looking only to the tidy extension: tidy_parse_string tidy_parse_file tidy_repair_string tidy_repair_file tidy_getopt tidy::__constructor tidy:

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Jason Garber
Hello Zeev, In the same way that public readonly properties would be useful from the global scope, protected readonly properties would be just as useful to those of us who spend their php-lives writing base classes (like me) for others to extend and use. I would imagine that the Zend Fr

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Nuno Lopes
I was not refering to the html/xhtml/xml input. I was talking about the charset parameter, for example. I don't want a chinese string passed as the charset name (the libtidy API isn't localized yet :) ). The same applies for the other functions. Nuno Are you sure want to generate a hard error

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 1:59 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote: > yeah we should simply rename the two files we have right now to > that. > I never knew which one to take since their names are not helpful. > In production we would set something like E_ALL & ~E_STRICT & > ~E_NOTICE. > While in development we

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Derick Rethans
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Nuno Lopes wrote: > I was not refering to the html/xhtml/xml input. I was talking about the > charset parameter, for example. I don't want a chinese string passed as the > charset name (the libtidy API isn't localized yet :) ). The same applies for > the other functions. Yeah

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 2:19 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote: > This is very true, yet i don't see a reason to include E_NOTICE and > E_STRICT > on a production machine. You've got 100% code coverage with all possible inputs and boundary conditions in your QA process?... Cuz, if not, I really don't see why

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 3:17 pm, Sebastian Bergmann wrote: > Edin Kadribasic wrote: >> OO purity/strictness do now work well with PHP's main strength -- >> its >> dynamicity. > > You make it sound like OO and dynamicity were mutually exclusive; > they > are not. Take a look at Smalltalk or CLOS to s

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Hartmut Holzgraefe
Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: Zeev Suraski wrote: What does that give you that class constants don't? i on the other hand fail to see how it is related to class constants at all? hm ... this was not supposed to get out as i had seen your reply to yourself ... -- Hartmut Holzgraefe, Senior Suppo

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Nuno Lopes
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Nuno Lopes wrote: I was not refering to the html/xhtml/xml input. I was talking about the charset parameter, for example. I don't want a chinese string passed as the charset name (the libtidy API isn't localized yet :) ). The same applies for the other functions. Yeah,

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 4:19 pm, Andrei Zmievski wrote: > That assumes there are a hundred places where you want to receive an > ASCII string. Are they really that prevalent? How many of the extension libraries are Unicode-ready? You see an awful lot of users with quasi-Unicode data that gets into t

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Richard Lynch
On Mon, May 15, 2006 2:47 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote: >> [...] Is there a significant performance >> enhancement in the engine that depends on eliminating semi-static >> or somesuch? > > Security. We might as well enable the crash function in non debug > builds. > Or just drop 'static' again and go

Re: [PHP-DEV] [php6] accepting an ascii string only

2006-05-15 Thread Andrei Zmievski
Derick, The case we're talking about here is where a Unicode string containing only ASCII characters is passed to an extension, not a binary string with the same characters. -Andrei On May 15, 2006, at 2:53 PM, Derick Rethans wrote: Yeah, but that doesnt mean you need to throw a hard error

Re: [PHP-DEV] Status of FastCGI in 5.1.4

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
Interesting, what os is this one and can they provide more info in regard to what "does not work" ? On 15-May-06, at 4:26 PM, Wez Furlong wrote: One of our customers reports that 5.1.4 fastcgi does not work, but that 5.2 does. It sounds like this needs to be addressed and a 5.1.5 released

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Ilia Alshanetsky
Erhm... I meant, add E_STRICT warning message to the code to the deprecated oo code. On 15-May-06, at 2:35 PM, Marcus Boerger wrote: Hello Ilia, Monday, May 15, 2006, 3:23:18 PM, you wrote: I suggest that we add E_STRICT now, but not include E_STRICT into E_ALL, We added E_STRICT in wha

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP Release Process Sucks

2006-05-15 Thread Lukas Smith
Marcus Boerger wrote: To rephrase Andi "So people screw up. I prefer having the occasional screw up then less people helping out." We are a community [...] What we need is more helping hands and less comlaining notes. Actually we are constantly working on increasing or QA efforts. And from my po

Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public

2006-05-15 Thread Andi Gutmans
Would a method be able to return a writable reference of this readonly property? If not it'd actually be PITA to prevent this. This is one of those questions which can turn a two second patch by Marcus, to an ongoing patch where we continue to fix various places and continue to bloat the langua

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Andi Gutmans
At 11:49 AM 5/15/2006, Brian Moon wrote: Steph Fox wrote: ini-dist is set at E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE ini-recommended is set at E_ALL I'd guess that's why Brian reports seeing E_ALL enabled on web hosts; they're advised to use the settings in ini-recommended, after all. Perhaps there should be an in

Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

2006-05-15 Thread Andi Gutmans
I don't see why it has to be a fatal error. If there's an instanceof relationship we can keep $this. If not, we should not pass $this (which I believe we already do in PHP 5), in which case the author would have to pass $this if he wants to change public properties. Andi At 12:49 PM 5/15/2006

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Steph Fox
At 11:49 AM 5/15/2006, Brian Moon wrote: Perhaps there should be an ini-development and an ini-production. "recommended" was born after "dist" because we wanted to show how to run PHP correctly (esp. BC breaking INI parameters such as register_globals=off which are recommended). It's a bit di

Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0

2006-05-15 Thread Brian Moon
If your production PHP code is generating so many entires in a log file that it's a problem for the log file size, then, really, you've got much bigger problems than the log file size... At dealnews, we have been using PHP since PHP/FI. We have written A LOT of code that never expected E_NOTIC