On 7/18/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pierre,
I wanted to send my 2c even though I'm not really involved in
internals@ any longer - because in reality it doesn't really have
much to do with such decisions. internals@ makes decisions that
effect the entire PHP userbase.
We all ne
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Hmm I don't quite understand what bad code vs. good code plays here.
> Wordpress is one of the most popular applications out there so it's got
> huge value to our community. I bet there's a huge amount of PHP
> applications who's source code is of the sam
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > that would actually benefit quite a bit from unicode support, but I guess
> > you are talking about porting with unicode==off, right?
>
> unicode=off doesn't mean no unicode support, btw.
Of course that's what it means, as none of the string fun
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 00:21 17/07/2007, Pierre wrote:
> >
> > On 7/16/07, Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I disagree with this view of the world.
> >
> > Well, we seem to all agree on this view, but let forget this
> > unsignificant fact :)
>
> I wanted to
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> David Wang wrote:
> >> Is it possible that total server throughput with gc could actually be
> >> better than unmodified php by preventing swapping at some higher
> >> level of concurrent requests?
> >
> > Yes, that's certainly true if it becomes the c
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 10:20 +0200, Derick Rethans wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > As for ereg - especially in light of the discontinuation of PHP 4 we
> > shouldn't even consider removing it in PHP 5.
>
> I don't think anybody wanted to remove it in PHP 5 - just make it
> p
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Andi Gutmans wrote:
>
> > There are clear things we want to change (like register_globals) because
> > we believe that ultimately they have a significant benefit to our users
> > with controllable downside (there is an easy one line workaround which
At 00:55 18/07/2007, Pierre wrote:
My answer to Andi was not only about ereg but php6 in general (the
unicode flag being a much more important problem that ereg, for
example).
I fully agree with you. Each individual here does not represent the
user base but only a relative small part.
However,
At 01:20 18/07/2007, Derick Rethans wrote:
This sounds like a broken record, this sounds like a broken record, this
sounds like a broken record. I've heard this so many times now, it
get's boring.
I'm not surprised, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true, though.
No matter how many time
Derick Rethans wrote:
> Regarding the unicode on/off modes, I don't think you put yourself in
> the developer's view at all. Users are not going to be better of having
> to deal with both modes.
Have you guys really thought this through?
Let's look at this from two angles.
First, from the our
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>
> Perhaps the real argument here is whether we should be doing Unicode at all?
I've watched these debate with tremendous interest. i18n is one of my
pure 'hobbies' (my 'clients' are all quite happy with ISO-8859-1, and
one of my backgrounds is WinNT where everything becam
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
Regarding the unicode on/off modes, I don't think you put yourself in
the developer's view at all. Users are not going to be better of having
to deal with both modes.
Have you guys really thought this through?
Let's look at this from two angles.
F
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 02:42 -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> What may be somewhat lost in all this, that I hope nobody here is
> forgetting, is that smooth Unicode support is really important. Being
Smooth it will be only if it's the only option. Otherwise it's just PITA
for both the camps. I'm all
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Zeev Suraski wrote:
...
You know what, I agree. I wrote something to that effect in my post
from a few minutes ago. The vast userbase is mostly comprised of
people we hardly even get to see.
Sorry to chime in on this already long thread with my -negative-
commit karma, but
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 12:23 +0200, Gaetano Giunta wrote:
> Maybe the only solution is making it easier to run different versions
> of php in parallel?
It's already easy and possible. Please don't start that discussion nor
spread the fud that it isn't.
--Jani
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Dev
Hi Zeev,
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 01:58 -0700, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >Regarding the unicode on/off modes, I don't think you put yourself in
> >the developer's view at all. Users are not going to be better of having
> >to deal with both modes.
>
> Well, I tend to agree with you that they shouldn't ha
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Finally, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we always need to
remember that BC breakage accumulates, and it's not binary. Every
cleanup we do in PHP 6 will further slow migration, and as Andi pointed
out a few days ago, things don't look too well as it is.
Agr
On 7/18/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Finally, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we always need to
> remember that BC breakage accumulates, and it's not binary. Every
> cleanup we do in PHP 6 will further slow migration, and as Andi pointed
>
Pierre wrote:
On 7/18/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
> Finally, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we always
need to
> remember that BC breakage accumulates, and it's not binary. Every
> cleanup we do in PHP 6 will further slow migration, and
Johannes Schlüter wrote:
Ah, another thing kind of related to this thread: We really need a
proper way of having decisions declared as being made. Recently it
happened quite often that many developer's thought some decision was
made (for example from reading the Paris meeting notes) and then s
On 7/10/07, Ignacio Arenaza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
now that there seems to be a maintainer of the LDAP extension (I've
cc'ed this message to him), I thought I could try to push this patch
again :-)
Instead of trying to push my own (limited) patch which only supports
pagedResults contro
Attached patch (if it comes through, Ins Allah :) overloads the
display_errors directive to accept 'stderr' as parameter which makes the
errors output to STDERR on CLI/CGI.
Applies to PHP_5_2 branch. Default is still STDOUT.
--Jani
Index: main/main.c
At 04:47 18/07/2007, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Finally, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we always
need to remember that BC breakage accumulates, and it's not
binary. Every cleanup we do in PHP 6 will further slow migration,
and as Andi pointed out a few days
On 7/18/07, Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well I don't think it really diminishes, but I agree that 1+1 is
maybe 1.9 and not 2. On the other hand, if you remember that
perception is everything (or at least very important), 1+1 can easily
be perceived as 3, and in a negative sense.
E
I do not know if this post made it to the list a while ago. No one
answered and i see I used the wrong account to send it. Please forgive
me if this is a redundant re-post.
This is a suggestion I think would not be too hard to implement:
Skip libc for all random functions. As I see it there i
Do you have a patch?
On 18-Jul-07, at 2:20 PM, Keryx Web wrote:
I do not know if this post made it to the list a while ago. No one
answered and i see I used the wrong account to send it. Please
forgive me if this is a redundant re-post.
This is a suggestion I think would not be too hard
Hi again!
Now that namespaces seem to be on their way into PHP 6 I wonder if
let-blocks, as in JavaScript 1.7+, ever has been considered for PHP, to
hide global variables from each other?
If so, can someone point me to the discussion?
For those that might have missed JS 1.7:
http://develope
Now that namespaces seem to be on their way into PHP 6 I wonder if
let-blocks, as in JavaScript 1.7+, ever has been considered for PHP, to
hide global variables from each other?
I personally am not convinced that PHP has any need for convoluted
scoping rules that "let" creates. What would be a
I don't get the point of it. IMO this will only add another level of
confusion to sourcecode; unless someone has a real good example (better
than those in the posted link) where this technique is required I cannot
see which benefit this feature adds.
regards
danielj
Keryx Web wrote:
> Hi again!
>
Functions would work properly with Unicode, but you would explicitly
create Unicode strings e.g. u"foobar". This is not uncommon practice and
many other languages actually go down this route incl. Python and
various versions of C++ frameworks.
Andi
> -Original Message-
> From: Derick Ret
Since there isn't any comments on this, should I have posted this
elsewhere? or is it just that no one is interested?
David Duong wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm emailing to this list to suggest that "support for type-hinted
return values"[1] be in added in PHP 5.y.x instead of PHP 6.
Conceptuall
On 7/18/07, David Duong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since there isn't any comments on this, should I have posted this
elsewhere? or is it just that no one is interested?
It could be interesting to know, if the reason why this hasn't been
implemented already, is technical one, or a design decisio
Hi all,
I'll probably be lynched for bringing up this subject again, since it
caused a long discussion a year ago. Anyway I look in the archives and
there was never a real conclusion made, so I'm bringing it up again.
This time for a feature I personally would like to see in PHP 6.
Very ofte
Translating the danish manual, since it somewhere really lacks of translation
and many pages has no translation at all.
So I wish to help translate the danish version of the php manual. And I havn't
been able to find any of the danish translators so Im not sure if theres any
active at the momen
I'll probably be lynched for bringing up this subject again, since it
caused a long discussion a year ago. Anyway I look in the archives and
there was never a real conclusion made, so I'm bringing it up again.
This time for a feature I personally would like to see in PHP 6.
Very often I want t
So the short answer is: no. End of story.
Don't start another endless thread about something that "would be nice" when we
have bigger issues on the table that need to be solved before any release, be it
alpha/beta/whatever, can be done..
--Jani
Sara Golemon kirjoitti:
I'll probably be lync
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:47:42 +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Garfield wrote:
>> Non-core PHP developer speaking, so read with that in mind:
>>
>> One of the things that held back PHP 5 adoption for so long, IMO, is the
>> large
>> amount of FUD that surrounded it. E
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Second, from the user space PHP developers' perspective. There are two
> groups of those out there. There is the group that builds apps for
> controlled environments. Yahoo, Facebook, and the hundreds, if not
> thousands of smaller companies ou
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 21:55 +0200, troels knak-nielsen wrote:
> On 7/18/07, David Duong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Since there isn't any comments on this, should I have posted this
> > elsewhere? or is it just that no one is interested?
>
> It could be interesting to know, if the reason why th
What is the status of bringing PHP build process up to current
automake/autoconf/libtool versions?...
Gentoo doesn't even have a libtool 1.4.x available, afaict...
I've down-graded automake and autoconf okay, but then I can't even
emerge wget to try and download libtool from source because emerge
Richard Lynch wrote:
> What is the status of bringing PHP build process up to current
> automake/autoconf/libtool versions?...
>
> Gentoo doesn't even have a libtool 1.4.x available, afaict...
>
> I've down-graded automake and autoconf okay, but then I can't even
> emerge wget to try and download
On Thu, July 19, 2007 12:45 am, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Richard Lynch wrote:
>> What is the status of bringing PHP build process up to current
>> automake/autoconf/libtool versions?...
> Or you could try simply using the current versions. They work fine.
Yes, they all fail equally well. :-)
[see
I sure hope this isn't something particularly bone-headed...
Meanwhile, what made me think that I was screwing up buildconf is
actually not related to any particular version of
automake/autoconf/libtool at all, as I get the same thing with all
combinations readily available under Gentoo, as well a
On 7/19/07, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kind of a PITA...
No problems here with automake-1.10 , autoconf-2.61 , libtool-1.5.22, bison-2.3.
the only oldie we had to keep is flex, as PHP buildsystem wont support
newer flex versions.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailin
44 matches
Mail list logo
