What's the idea behind breaking compatibility of backwards compatible APIs? ;)
Cheers,
Mike
On 09/27/2010 03:19 AM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
kalleMon, 27 Sep 2010 01:19:57 +
Revision: http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revision&revision=303773
Log:
Remov
hi,
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> What's the idea behind breaking compatibility of backwards compatible APIs?
> ;)
That's why php-next is not php 5.3.x but something either 6 or 5.4.
About this change, it is usually a good thing as tsrmls_fetch is horribly slow.
Che
On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 16:27 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Michael Wallner wrote:
> > What's the idea behind breaking compatibility of backwards compatible APIs?
> > ;)
>
> That's why php-next is not php 5.3.x but something either 6 or 5.4.
>
> About this c
Hi
2010/9/27 Johannes Schlüter :
> I think Mike's point was that these functions, according to the comment,
> only exist for BC reasons. So they should either keep BC or be dropped.
>
The only usage php_idate() exists for is the idate() function, i
greped pecl and tried to use OpenGrok, but it wa
