Hi, Lazare
This is something not obvious, at least for me, and should be handled in
the function itself.
Here it would be better to update the function *add()* that you could also
pass mixed and it will try to generate a *DateInterval *out of that or
whatever.
But that's another RFC.
Type-juggli
Hi all,
I've made a patch for #60075 because it's a feature I'll find very useful. It's
my first patch so it'd be great to get some feedback.
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=60075
Thanks.
-Stuart
--
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/
OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that stops
'I do not recall the state of short_open_tag changing but was that 'defaulted' to
off when previously it was on? I had thought that 'been left alone, but now I'm told that is only on PHP5.4.0
Something broke sites with
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
> OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that
> stops ' I do not recall the state of short_open_tag changing but was that
> 'defaulted' to off when previously it was on? I had thought that ' discussed and had been left
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 13:50 +, Lester Caine wrote:
> OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that stops
Nothing as a
$ svn diff \
https://svn.php.net/repository/php/php-src/tags/php_5_3_9 \
https://svn.php.net/repository/php/php-src/tags/php_5_3_10
clearly shows
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Lester Caine mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk>> wrote:
OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that stops
'http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3/main/main.c?view=annotate
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/p
Hi,
As PHP (co)maintainer in Fedora, I sometime need to access security bugs
which are private.
Ex: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55500
Can I be granted for such access ?
Regards,
Remi.
P.S. I already have an SVN account : remi
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To un
On 2012-03-02, David Soria Parra wrote:
> just a heads up. The PHP_5_4 branch is open for commits again.
Related: With 5.4.0 out... how soon will the cutover to git occur?
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead| matt...@zend.com
Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/
On 2012-03-02, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
> Well, there are a few questions about the implementation:
>
> 1. *Which* type casting rules should it follow?
>
> a. Regular cast rules (like $foo = (int) $foo), where it converts
> always without error?
> b. Internal function cast rules, where it warnings o
On 2012-03-02, Pierre Joye wrote:
> It should have been done before 5.4.0 was out, but better late than never.
>
> I put together four options here:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php53eol
>
> I'm in favor of option #1, as it gives enough time to our users to
> migrate by reducing the maintenance pe
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 10:27 -0500, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> On 2012-03-02, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > It should have been done before 5.4.0 was out, but better late than never.
> >
> > I put together four options here:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php53eol
> >
> > I'm in favor of option #1
Matthew,
Have you seen the new thread and RFC around this?
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/parameter_type_casting_hints
I went with option A, as I see erroring on cast as a more general
problem. So for consistency, I implemented it exactly like normal
explicit casts...
Anthony
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at
hi Matthew,
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> Considering that 5.3 adoption is still eclipsed by 5.2 adoption, to be
> honest, it feels like doing 1 year bugfix + 1 year security fix is the
> minimum necessary. By the time we get good adoption of 5.3, it will
> alr
See the other mail from David on Saturday:
http://news.php.net/php.internals/58549
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> On 2012-03-02, David Soria Parra wrote:
>> just a heads up. The PHP_5_4 branch is open for commits again.
>
> Related: With 5.4.0 out... how soon w
hi!
That one is public :)
But yes, you should have access and be part of security@
Cheers,
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As PHP (co)maintainer in Fedora, I sometime need to access security bugs
> which are private.
>
> Ex: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55500
>
"This bug report is marked as private."
or did that changed just now?
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi!
>
> That one is public :)
>
> But yes, you should have access and be part of security@
>
> Cheers,
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Remi Collet
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
On 5 March 2012 17:20, Pierre Joye wrote:
> hi Matthew,
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>
> > Considering that 5.3 adoption is still eclipsed by 5.2 adoption, to be
> > honest, it feels like doing 1 year bugfix + 1 year security fix is the
> > minimum necessa
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Bostjan Skufca wrote:
> This has to be stressed time and again, in order to start changing current
> perception that upgrading to newer PHP release is a major PITA.
I suppose you mean "not anymore" :)
Then go out there to spread the new message and facts! :)
-
Anthony,
I still don't like the null-as-a-default-value solution. I find it
confusing.
I know that something similar appears in class type hinting, but:
1. Class type hinting does not do casting (yet).
2. Apart from null, no other value could be placed anyway. (Even that is a
little bit wrong as
Le 05/03/2012 17:44, Remi Collet a écrit :
> Perhaps, the new result is the right one... but I don't find any other
> tool to check it...
Using a simple C program (linked against libmash)
Hash: fdb9019a79c33a95677e2097abae91eb0de00b3054bb5c39
So the result from php <= 5.3.10 seems the right one
done for bugs.
for the sec@ list it can take some more time.
Cheers,
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As PHP (co)maintainer in Fedora, I sometime need to access security bugs
> which are private.
>
> Ex: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55500
>
> Can I be granted for
Please review https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=61291
And attached patch
Without the patch
37 PASSED TESTS
0 SKIPPED TESTS
2 FAILED TESTS:
mhash_001.phpt
mhash_003.phpt
With the patch
34 PASSED TESTS
0 SKIPPED TESTS
5 FAILED TESTS:
hash_copy_001.phpt
hash_file_basic1.phpt
hash_hmac_basic.phpt
h
On 5 March 2012 17:45, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Bostjan Skufca wrote:
>
> > This has to be stressed time and again, in order to start changing
> current
> > perception that upgrading to newer PHP release is a major PITA.
>
> I suppose you mean "not anymore" :)
>
> Th
Hi, Lazare
In your examples you are accessing an maybe non-existing array-key.
This will raise an E_NOTICE. See the note below this example:
http://php.net/manual/en/language.types.array.php#example-85
Maybe you also want something like that:
isset($x) ? (is_null($x) ? null : (int)$x) : null
But
>
> In your examples you are accessing an maybe non-existing array-key
Yes, this is why I used the error silencing (@) operator. But anyway, it is
irrelevant to the whole proposal.
Lazare INEPOLOGLOU
Ingénieur Logiciel
2012/3/5 Simon Schick
> Hi, Lazare
>
> In your examples you are accessing
Hi, Lazare
Sorry, I've only looked at your first array-example :)
Bye
Simon
2012/3/5 Lazare Inepologlou
> In your examples you are accessing an maybe non-existing array-key
>
>
> Yes, this is why I used the error silencing (@) operator. But anyway, it
> is irrelevant to the whole proposal.
>
FYI-
Voting will be closed at 2 PM (PST) tomorrow.
--Kris
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
> Just a friendly reminder to vote on this if you haven't already. 5 people
> have voted on it thus far but I'd like to have at least twice that by the
> time voting closes.
>
> You ca
Hi Lazare,
I'm a bit divided on your proposal.
On one hand I kind of like the simplicity of the syntax and the basic
idea behind it:
> (int?) $x
>
> which should be strictly translated to the following, without any way to
> change that behavior by any type casting overload system:
>
> is_null($x)
> This could be usefull for other instances as (string null) or (bool
> null) as well... Your thoughts?
Typo! The examples should read (string unset) and (bool unset)
BTW: Order would equal what is type casted OR simply accepted!
~ Daniel Macedo
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Maili
Hi Daniel,
No, it is not inspired from the short ternary operator. It's a rather
common conversion. C# has a similar notion of nullable types (with totally
different mechanics however). By the way, in this particular area PHP's
type system is more sound than that of C#, because null is not just a
On 2012-03-02, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> On 03/02/2012 07:34 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/php53eol
>
> I discussed with Arne Blankerts and Stefan Priebsch over breakfast today
> and Stefan had an interesting idea: why not announce (now) that PHP 5.3
> will go into EO
Sorry, I used unset in the same way type casting works, not as in
unset() ... Common gotcha: http://php.net/unset#example-4824
Here's how the manual refers to it:
http://php.net/type-juggling
(int), (integer) - cast to integer
(bool), (boolean) - cast to boolean
(float), (double), (real) - cast t
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
wrote:
> +1.
Votes are for later.
> Since so many distros and ISPs tend to adopt late, this would keep them,
> and their users, covered for a reasonable time period, allowing for a
> cleaner migration path.
There is a clear migration path
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that
> stops ' I do not recall the state of short_open_tag changing but was that
> 'defaulted' to off when previously it was on? I had thought that ' discussed and had been left
On 2012-03-05, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
> wrote:
>
> > +1.
>
> Votes are for later.
This was an indication of being in favor of the proposal, no more, no
less.
> > Since so many distros and ISPs tend to adopt late, this would keep them,
> > an
Personally, I HATE short_open_tab. It has no value-- *except* that,
unfortunately, it's still widely used in many apps and even some frameworks
TTBOMK. So, as worthless as it is, removing it completely would render
these apps inoperable. Leaving it turned-off by default is a given I
think, as a
Err *short_open_tag
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
> Personally, I HATE short_open_tab. It has no value-- *except* that,
> unfortunately, it's still widely used in many apps and even some frameworks
> TTBOMK. So, as worthless as it is, removing it completely would render
>
Galen Wright-Watson wrote:
OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that
> stops ' I do not recall the state of short_open_tag changing but was that
> 'defaulted' to off when previously it was on? I had thought that' discussed and had been left alone, but now I'm told
Kris Craig wrote:
Personally, I HATE short_open_tab. It has no value--*except* that,
unfortunately, it's still widely used in many apps and even some frameworks
TTBOMK. So, as worthless as it is, removing it completely would render
these apps inoperable. Leaving it turned-off by default is a
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
> Personally, I HATE short_open_tab. It has no value-- *except* that,
> unfortunately, it's still widely used in many apps and even some frameworks
> TTBOMK.
I personally like it and find value in its inclusion :)
Adam
I understand the problem with wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
>
>> Personally, I HATE short_open_tab. It has no value-- *except* that,
>> unfortunately, it's still widely used in many apps and even some frameworks
>> TTBOMK.
>
>
> I personally like it and find value i
Certainly. I don't believe this is about "inclusion" any more than
creating a function called "ech" as an alias for "echo" would be. The wrote:
> I understand the problem with safe enough to me. Glad it's standard in 5.4.
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Adam Jon Richardson
> wrote:
> > On
Am 06.03.2012 01:03, schrieb Kris Craig:
> I've never understood the "it's easier to read" argument since I've found
> it to be exactly the opposite. The me, makes it more difficult to "at a glance" see where the PHP code begins
if you hvae a usebale editor would become different colors
only
On Windows (where I generally do most of my scripting grunt work), I
typically use Notepad++ and it highlights wrote:
>
>
> Am 06.03.2012 01:03, schrieb Kris Craig:
> > I've never understood the "it's easier to read" argument since I've found
> > it to be exactly the opposite. The > me, makes it
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Galen Wright-Watson wrote:
>
>> OK what changed in the automatic updates from PHP5.3.9 to 5.3.10 that
>>> > stops '>> > I do not recall the state of short_open_tag changing but was that
>>> > 'defaulted' to off when previously it was on? I
Hello,
I came across some info on the web that states that scalar type hinting was
added to the PHP trunk but it did not make it's way into 5.4 because of
objections from the community. Will it ever make it's way into 5.5?
I know PHP is considered to be a weak typed language but it should also be
Wow no offense, but your timing is terrible, Raymond! We've been going
back and forth on this for the past couple weeks now, though the discussion
has quieted for the moment.
I would suggest you go through some of the recent posts on Internals.
Right now there basically is no solid consensus on t
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
> Certainly. I don't believe this is about "inclusion" any more than
> creating a function called "ech" as an alias for "echo" would be. The tag, as you all know, creates problems when working with XML. Furthermore,
> I've never understood the
Woops ok, you're right about that.
So then, the short open tag is still just wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Kris Craig wrote:
>
>> Certainly. I don't believe this is about "inclusion" any more than
>> creating a function called "ech" as an alias for "echo" would be. The > tag, as you
Plugins are a big deal (see
http://oneofmanyworlds.blogspot.in/2012/03/difficult-decision.html for a
recent example.) In this era of mashups and breakneck innovation,
developers must rely on vast amounts of code they've never seen, let alone
audited. Wordpress, Drupal, and many other tools develope
50 matches
Mail list logo
