Any objections to applying the attached patch? This would suppress date
output in the generated output so that (hopefully) files generated by
re2c are not changed during the build just because of the date.
>From 21f8149129609594a01bb08c77088effbe422aa7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Be
Not sure if the date is significant, but just received notification that 1&1
will drop support for PHP4 and PHP5.2 from April 1, 2013 - yes PHP4 is still
available as their default!
The move is to PHP5.4, but the interesting thing is that they are calling it
PHP6 simply to isolate it from PHP5
What a great way to confuse people.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Not sure if the date is significant, but just received notification that
> 1&1 will drop support for PHP4 and PHP5.2 from April 1, 2013 - yes PHP4 is
> still available as their default!
>
> The move is to
On 4 December 2012 09:04, Lester Caine wrote:
> April 1, 2013
>
>
The date is somewhat suspicious ;)
On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 09:04 +, Lester Caine wrote:
>
>
> The move is to PHP5.4, but the interesting thing is that they are
> calling it
> PHP6 simply to isolate it from PHP5.2
> http://faq.1and1.co.uk/scripting/php/5.html
well, the actual reason is that they offered the old PHP 6 before as
So, I've been going through the internals of date() and related,
trying to isolate where some poor performance is, to try and find ways
to optimize it. In doing so, I came across this:
On line 863 of ext/date/php_date.c is this code:
} else if (*DATEG(default_timezone) &&
timelib_timezone_
Lester, are you seriously suggesting we coddle providers who either
[a] Willfully misrepresent the PHP versioning system, showing they are
utterly tuned out of the PHP support community?
or
[b] Play unfunny practical jokes on their users and/or troll this very
list?
If anything, their behavio
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
Lester, are you seriously suggesting we coddle providers who either
[a] Willfully misrepresent the PHP versioning system, showing they are
utterly tuned out of the PHP support community?
Well they are only one of the ISP's who have been posting PHP6 as their next
suppo
> I'm lead to believe that the date was chosen simply because they do consider
> the situation a bit of a joke ...
Speaking as a current and long-time customer of 1and1 hosting, I do
believe that their business situation is a bit of a joke. I know this
is not a list to talk about various hosting p
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > I'm lead to believe that the date was chosen simply because they do
> consider
> > the situation a bit of a joke ...
>
> Speaking as a current and long-time customer of 1and1 hosting, I do
> believe that their business situation is a bit of
On 5 December 2012 08:26, Kris Craig wrote:
> Seriously, though, 1and1 is a joke. That's not exactly breaking news. If
> it really bugs us that much, we could always put up a statement on the
> website rebuking their misrepresentation of our version numbering and leak
> it to a few tech blogs.
Hi!
> Any objections to applying the attached patch? This would suppress date
> output in the generated output so that (hopefully) files generated by
> re2c are not changed during the build just because of the date.
I think it is a great idea. If we ever need a date for checked in files,
we ha
On 12/05/2012 06:06 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Any objections to applying the attached patch? This would suppress date
>> output in the generated output so that (hopefully) files generated by
>> re2c are not changed during the build just because of the date.
>
> I think it is a great idea. If
13 matches
Mail list logo
