y use this type of setup, albeit
insecurely.
Best regards,
Andrew Miller
diff -rbud ./php-5.2.8-orig/sapi/cgi/cgi_main.c ./php-5.2.8/sapi/cgi/cgi_main.c
--- ./php-5.2.8-orig/sapi/cgi/cgi_main.c 2009-02-10 21:37:09.0 +1300
+++ ./php-5.2.8/sapi/cgi/cgi_main.c 2009-02-11 00:07:51.0
if you are interested:
http://koula.co.za/screwdll.zip
I am creating files in c:/ to check if a function runs, and only the
pm9screw_open
doesn't run, when replacing zend_open with it
Thanks if you can help
Regards
Andrew
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscri
warning messages any more and they will sure that variable
value is set correctly.
--
Sincerely,
Andrew mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Oh! Thanks Nikita. I did not know that the exceptions in the engine already
accepted. But in fairness, in PHP "A $a" typehint does not make sure that
"$a instanceof A " returns true. You can change "test" fucntion in code
form my first message to
function test(A $a)
{
var_dump($a instanceof A);
}
ave a separate voting option for this.`
It's realy cool! Thanks you!
Best regards.
Andrew Kluev.
2015-03-13 15:40 GMT+03:00 Andrew Kluev :
> Oh! Thanks Nikita. I did not know that the exceptions in the engine
> already accepted. But in fairness, in PHP "A $a" typehint doe
PHP 5.6.7-1 (cli) (built: Mar 24 2015 12:30:15)
Copyright (c) 1997-2015 The PHP Group
Zend Engine v2.6.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2015 Zend Technologies
with Zend OPcache v7.0.4-dev, Copyright (c) 1999-2015, by Zend
Technologies
with Xdebug v2.2.5, Copyright (c) 2002-2014, by Derick Rethans
un
It is very informative, but not resolve the problem, php completely ignored
my max_execution_teme setup with any SAPI, in all cases
2015-06-11 14:57 GMT+03:00 Andrew Kluev :
> And php7 not working too.
>
> php7 -v
> PHP 7.0.0-dev (cli) (built: Mar 30 2015 12:26:36) (DEBUG)
&g
)
> Copyright (c) 1997-2015 The PHP Group
> Zend Engine v3.0.0-dev, Copyright (c) 1998-2015 Zend Technologies
>
> $ time ./sapi/cli/php test.php
> php_sapi_name: cli
> max_input_time: -1
> max_execution_time: 0
> max_input_time: -1
> max_execution_time: 2
>
> Fatal error: M
did effect
backwards compatibility a tiny bit.
My question is, should I go back and edit NEWS to put my change in? It
would go under "PHP 5.4.0 Alpha 1"
And if I do put it in, do I put it in both trunk and branches/PHP_5_4 ?
Also, everyone is using first names only in NEWS but Andrew is no
We've got a problem with PHP 5.3.8 and a third party (open source)
library (WSo2 SOAP).
At some point during the request to the PHP script, some structures seem
to be getting corrupted causing PHP to crash.
Depending on the code in the PHP script, it's either crashing during in
a print_r/var_
ys as
essentially look-up tables before.
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
first PHP extension function, and PHP test I've written.
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Changed, it now takes just an array.
Function signature:
mixed array_last_key(array $array)
On 13 July 2012 23:31, Andrew Faulds wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I'm proposing a function called array_last_key(), that takes a
> reference to an array, and returns the key of its l
Hi there,
This is a patch that replaces PHP's infamous logo GUIDs with data URIs
instead, and also embed PHP credits in the phpinfo() page, hidden
using JavaScript (but gracefully degrading), to eliminate these GUIDs
altogether.
:)
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/132
--
Andrew Faulds
forwarding.
On 16 July 2012 02:11, Larry Garfield wrote:
> I think you meant to send that to the list. :-)
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
>
> On 07/15/2012 08:07 PM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>>
>> It would be nice if PHP 6 unified the semantics of
>> string/int/float/
Yeah, we could do something like Java: primitive typed and OOP wrapped
types.
On Jul 16, 2012 10:25 AM, "Ralf Lang" wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > 1. Change the error handling system from the current E_* system to
> > typed exceptions for everything but advisory er
i,
>
> interesting, but am I the only one that we could also boost the performance
> of the Zend Engine, if we would throw out everything, except the "PHP 1.0"
> features: functions, arrays, ints, floats and strings
> not that we should do that, I just think that the numbers are some
ends
> RuntimeException).
>
> What do you think? Would this be viable? Is there any still-present reason
> why we shouldn't support that?
>
> --
> Ferenc Kovács
> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
at does this proposal add to it?
>
> Nikita
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
ouldn't support that?
>
> I don't like this overloaded meaning of "final". "final" currently
> means "cannot be overwritten by inheritance". This would add a second
> meaning which would be somewhat similar to "const" (but only
>
it's also concepts
> of handling errors. And much other stuff.
>
> Again: This is off-topic. The RFC is very fine, it's a good work, I
> like it! Really, I do! :)
>
> But for me - as PHP-developer - it's like renewing all doors of a
> house with newest technique, but forgetting the windows. :) Security
> is a concept. My suggestions aren't perfect. Just want to talk about
> it; I think those concepts need time.
>
> --
> Alex Aulbach
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
$str = random_string(15, "0-9a-zA-Z./");
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Nikita
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> importance here. If you want to discuss moving the internal functions
>> to some new error model, please start a new thread. It is definitely
>> something worth discussing, but is rather off-topic here.
>
>
> Definitely agree. Unless the discussion is specific to this
which manipulates date
> stored in other attributes. The given example is an $Hours attributes,
> which is calculated from the private $Seconds attribute.
> Again, it could be very useful. But it doesn't work all the time.
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
d would be
impractical to use in passwords.
Russian though, maybe. However I think most passwords are alphanumeric.
Besides, this isn't to generate passwords, it's to generate salts and
other random strings.
>
> 3. Because generating a string from character-classes is very hand
named and possibly implemented.
I am working on an implementation of this for arrays, but I haven't
got very far. However, for someone that knows the Zend engine
internals, it does not appear to me that adding such things would be
very difficult.
Thoughts?
--
Andrew Faulds (AJF)
http://ajf.me/
That would be nice and all, but I'd rather we add methods to arrays.
On Jul 17, 2012 1:26 AM, "David Muir" wrote:
> On 14/07/12 01:33, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> I know that 6.0 was originally supposed to be the unicode conversion of
>> the
>> engine. However it appears that all p
I think strings are even more important, they have an even messier API than
arrays.
On Jul 17, 2012 11:07 AM, "Pierre Joye" wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Gustavo Lopes
> wrote:
>
> > Let's ignore empty arguments like "make[s] PHP feel modern". That aside,
> the
> > main argum
I might not have made it clear, but the main reasons I want it are:
- Chance to clean up array/string/etc APIs
- Looks nicer IMO, slightly clearer what functions do and affect
On Jul 17, 2012 11:21 AM, "Gustavo Lopes" wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:07:09 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> On Tue, J
This is an excellent idea. Full BC yet without legacy cruft. Old code runs
on legacy support extensions, new code doesn't need it.
On Jul 17, 2012 1:51 PM, "Leigh" wrote:
> > Basically, the current function library is moved to the legacy
> > namespace. The default setting is import the functions
Whilst weak typing has its benefits, I think typing is a little too weak in
places. IMO "" should not be equal to 0 or coercable to 0. But of course
"0" should equal 0.
On Jul 17, 2012 3:04 PM, "Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote:
> On 07/17/2012 03:07 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 20
The problem, of course, is changing and removing things can break BC. I'd
love to remove list() too, but that would break code relying on it.
On Jul 17, 2012 4:23 PM, "Christoph Hochstrasser" <
christoph.hochstras...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some of the things I want to see in PHP 6:
>
> New de
atibility with PHP 5.
>
>
> *Dan Cryer*
> +Dan <https://plus.google.com/101400775372325517263>
> @dancryer <http://www.twitter.com/dancryer>
>
>
>
> On 17 July 2012 16:32, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 17, 2012 4:23 PM, "Christoph Hoch
course some BC breaks
>> may
>> be necessary (a-la what happened with PHP5), but they should be fairly
>> localized and pretty easy to handle... And they should be justified
>> (breaking BC for the sake of it, as with these legacy functions, would be
>> a
>> mis
Sounds good, search engines aren't always super smart.
On Jul 18, 2012 1:20 AM, "Kris Craig" wrote:
> I just noticed something that I hadn't really thought about before. I
> couldn't remember the name of the function for parsing INI files so I did a
> quick search. It took me straight to the pa
OK, ok. Let me clear some things up here.
We don't want it to make things more object-oriented or whatever. The real
motivation is to give us a chance to make a much cleaner, much nicer array
API without breaking BC. We can keep the legacy array_* and unprefixed
functions, but we can also create "
Sounds good. CoffeeScript (a lightweight language with JS semantics that
compiles to JS) has a existential operator, "?", and this looks similar and
would be very nice. It's not the same thing, of course. It also reminds me
of JavaScript's || behaviour.
On Jul 18, 2012 3:24 PM, "Rafael Dohms" wrot
Sounds great. Python has something similar for tuples, would be good if PHP
had this.
Are there any BC concerns? Don't see why this could break something.
On Jul 18, 2012 3:50 PM, "Laruence" wrote:
> Hi:
> this is not a new RFC, I proposed it before, but due to my poor
> english and improp
obj.method(obj, 12)
>
> But OOP-like syntax on non-object data is still weird. The question about
> data manipulation behavior (is it a pointer like other objects or is it a
> scalar like existing array?) is a tough one.
>
>
> 2012/7/18 Andrew Faulds
>
>> OK, ok. Let me
WHAT?
Er, sorry, accidental capslock. This IS a new API. That was an example. I'm
not saying just put -> everywhere, I'm saying we can keep array_* and add a
new set of -> functions which are well-designed, consistent, etc.
On Jul 18, 2012 5:35 PM, "Stas Malyshev" wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > enough but I
Obviously. This is simply the means to provide the new API without breaking
BC. If people think this is acceptable then sure, let's plan an API.
On Jul 18, 2012 5:54 PM, "Stas Malyshev" wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Er, sorry, accidental capslock. This IS a new API. That was an example.
> > I'm not saying j
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>> To avoid BC breaks we should try to avoid major syntax changes. We could
>> make new applications "hide" legacy though, something like "use new;"
>> which
>> would remove deprecated and legac
Kris, I'd love to break BC a lot and fix things, but it would seriously
slow adoption. Fixing *bugs* has stopped people upgrading, imagine how they
would react to non-bugs being changed.
On Jul 18, 2012 7:21 PM, "Kris Craig" wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:27
Chaos will surely be, if we break PHP5 code. It should work without
modification. wrote:
> > use a slightly modified version of the open tag, for example > <*php, etc. This satisfies several desires: we don't want an extra
> > line of boilerplate code like 'use PHP 6' to be required in every
> >
...er, wrote:
> > use a slightly modified version of the open tag, for example > <*php, etc. This satisfies several desires: we don't want an extra
> > line of boilerplate code like 'use PHP 6' to be required in every
> > source file, we want a PHP 5 file to run without modification, and we
> >
Sure, BC breaks for 6.0, but it worries me. I don't want a Python 3 for PHP
6. Or heck, PHP5 for that matter.
On Jul 18, 2012 9:50 PM, "Stan Vass" wrote:
> Chaos will surely be, if we break PHP5 code. It should work without
>> modification. > On Jul 18, 2012 9:34 PM, "Daniel Macedo" wrote:
>>
>
Cap it at INT_MAX, yeah, that seems reasonable. A notice seems reasonable
but production servers displaying errors... devs will go mad :)
On Jul 18, 2012 11:39 PM, "Nikita Popov" wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> When a large floating point number is cast to an integer we currently
> have very low-level
Our syntax is very, very confusing for newbies. Also, procedural and OOP
programming is unnatural and unintuitive. We should use the natural LISP
braces syntax and make PHP functional, so it is much easier to write, e.g.:
((decl (main (echo (add (reverse (array (1 2 3))) (string ('h 'e 'l 'l 'o
'\
One consideration: Should be a general array/string/int/float/bool API. PHP
is weakly typed: therefore, say, reverse() would reverse a string OR an
array. negate() would invert a bool, negate an int/float. slice() would
slice a section of a string OR an array. max() would find maximum of an
array,
Right, because I've never got them the wrong way round, that is completely
logical, and this syntax makes it much harder.
On Jul 19, 2012 1:17 AM, "Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 05:10 PM, David Muir wrote:
> > On 19/07/12 04:49, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> >> On 07/18/2012 01:02 AM, Pierre J
+1
There's a reason that web browser APIs have so much cruft (user-agent
string, yuck), and there's a reason for ECMAScript 5's "use strict" instead
of "use legacy". Old code should work without changing it. Otherwise a lot
of things break which take a lot of time to fix, and even worse, devs can
7
> probably should have the legacy API but have it be turned off by
> default.
>
> I'll close this letter by stating the one thing I *DON'T* want to see
> - a legacy API that doesn't let all the old code work. Nothing is
> more infuriating than having an emulator no
Always close , but never close :)
On Jul 19, 2012 4:44 PM, "Larry Garfield" wrote:
> On 7/19/12 5:11 AM, Peter Beverloo wrote:
>
> I have seen this problem happen, people losing time trying to figure out
>>> what is wrong only to find
>>> its a missing bracket.
>>> As Paul said, this is bug-pro
We can have more consistent naming, at least.
I like this idea even more now, it means we could have a set of universal
operations:
$bool->negate(); // true -> false
$num->negate(); // 7 -> -7
$numericString->negate(); // "123" -> -123
$float->negate(); // 3.141592 -> -3.141592
$customVectorType-
.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
> On 7/19/12 10:52 AM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>> Always close , but never close :)
>> On Jul 19, 2012 4:44 PM, "Larry Garfield" wrote:
>>
>> On 7/19/12 5:11 AM, Peter Beverloo wrote:
>>>
>>> I have se
PHP is all about backwards compatibility.
We only break things that need to be broken. The legacy
str*/str_*/string_*/array_* functions will still work.
On Jul 19, 2012 5:36 PM, "Lester Caine" wrote:
> Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>> should still work. All the string API methods need to be available on
his 'sexy'
>> stuff,
>> we are all then forced to have to work with it even if we can ignore
>> it in
>> our own code. ONE of these days I'd like to get back to putting some
>> new
>> functions in my own code base. I'm still working
Forgive my ignorance, what is APC?
On Jul 19, 2012 7:15 PM, "Rasmus Lerdorf" wrote:
> The goal of this message is to encourage and motivate a few people to
> give me a hand with tracking down APC bugs. There are still a few
> outstanding bugs that is slowing PHP 5.4 adoption and it would be reall
I never said treat them as objects. I said give them methods. Not the same
thing.
And what do you mean by "technical debt"?
On Jul 19, 2012 9:52 PM, "Sara Golemon" wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>> I think PHP cou
Ah, thanks. My mobile internet is horribly slow: But somehow Gmail works
pretty fast (constant connection??). Hence not Googling first.
On Jul 19, 2012 10:44 PM, "Kalle Sommer Nielsen" wrote:
> 2012/7/19 Andrew Faulds :
> > Forgive my ignorance, what is APC?
>
> Alter
I'm curious, how do I make my objects have scalar passing semantics, then?
On Jul 20, 2012 12:35 AM, "Sara Golemon" wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Andrew Faulds wrote:
>
>> I never said treat them as objects. I said give them methods. Not the
>&
I don't think we should add it purely for consistency, because then we'd
have to allow nonsense like:
switch x;
case 1;
endcase;
endswitch;
or...
try;
x;
catch e;
endtry;
Sure, consistency is good, but this would allow sloppy code.
On Jul 20, 2012 8:36 AM, "Amaury Bouchard" wrote:
> 2012/7/19
Exactly. Much of my focus is making PHP more consistent and logical, and
hence easier to learn. It would be nice if PHP was as easy as Python,
someday. (for example)
On Jul 20, 2012 10:57 AM, "Rafael Dohms" wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>
> >
> > And still seems
Whilst I feel some sympathy for you, I must ask if it is really the PHP
project to blame if your hosts use old PHP versions?
On Jul 20, 2012 12:50 PM, "Lester Caine" wrote:
> Daniel Macedo wrote:
>
>> >One little change in PHP5.3.10 or so wiped out a whole block of mine, and
>>> >the fix involved
Well, in the spirit of PHP, let's make version_compare_fixed()!
On Jul 20, 2012 1:41 PM, "Rasmus Schultz" wrote:
> From the comments in the documentation, it seems others are having the same
> problem with version_compare() that I was running into:
>
> http://us2.php.net/version_compare
>
> Look
If I understand this correctly, this is like what Python let's you do with
tuples. It's handy for getting vector components, hostnames and port
numbers, etc. (I apologise for the Python comparison, it is just the
language where I usually encounter this, and it makes heavy use of
foreach-style loops
Python isn't coding-style constrained, it just uses increases and decreases
whitespace as part of the block syntax. It has considerable flexibility,
but not PHP/Perl-level.
On Jul 20, 2012 3:33 PM, "Amaury Bouchard" wrote:
> 2012/7/20 Alex Aulbach
>
> > PS: And if without brackets should be forb
Yeah, that's what I realised as I wrote that. PHP functions don't really
use tuples etc. very much, unlike Python. That said, now we have short
array syntax, and if we add this, perhaps people will use it more.
Still, at the moment the usefulness of this is limited. Perhaps
destructuring assignmen
Yeah, that would definitely be a bug.
On Jul 21, 2012 7:23 AM, "Kris Craig" wrote:
> > 1.01 eq 1.1
>
> Could you explain this one to me? In every versioning system I've ever
> used, 1.1 would be greater than 1.01, not equal.
>
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Stas Malyshev >wrote:
> >
>
I also think
Logout
Log in | Register
With
Logout
Log in | Register
On Jul 21, 2012 8:03 AM, "Lester Caine" wrote:
> Rick Bird wrote:
>
>>My name is Rick.. I done some light work on documentation side of
>> things,
>> but I had a question because I've been working a lot with the Symfon
What? x, x.y, x.y.z, x.y.z.a, etc are all valid.
1, 1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.2.3, in that order, would be valid.
On Jul 21, 2012 10:07 AM, "Pierre Joye" wrote:
> hi!
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Rasmus Schultz
> wrote:
>
> > Of course that would break backwards compatibility, which kind of defeat
. They are just not
> correct and confusing, as you noticed.
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Andrew Faulds
> wrote:
> > What? x, x.y, x.y.z, x.y.z.a, etc are all valid.
> > 1, 1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.2.3, in that order, would be valid.
> >
> > On Jul 21, 2012 10:
t not
> correct and confusing, as you noticed.
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Andrew Faulds
> wrote:
> > What? x, x.y, x.y.z, x.y.z.a, etc are all valid.
> > 1, 1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.2.3, in that order, would be valid.
> >
> > On Jul 21, 2012 10:07 AM, "Pierr
If you think 1.1 =/= 1.01 you're sure using some weird version numbers.
Only 1.0.1 would be smaller.
Has anyone seen these weird version ordering schemes in practise? On any
major projects of note?
On Jul 21, 2012 10:51 AM, "Tjerk Meesters" wrote:
>
>
> On 21 Jul, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Kris Craig w
Maybe it should have an optional extra parameter specifying comparison
"mode"? (I.e. version formatting)
On Jul 21, 2012 1:08 PM, "Ángel González" wrote:
> On 21/07/12 11:32, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > No, I mean version with 1.0 and not 1.0.0 are not. They are just not
> > correct and co
Don't worry, I unsubscribed on old account. It's forwarding.
On 23 July 2012 at 00:49 Good Guy wrote:
> On 22/07/2012 15:40, Andrew Faulds wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > My old email address was ajf...@googlemail.com, I am now using a...@ajf.me.
> >
>
pretty sure I'm not the only
person who wants to fetch a random array value, not a random array key, too.
It's useful also in the scenario where you want a random value of nested arrays
($array['thing']['foo']).
Enough rambling, here's a pull request. https://gith
t logical
- Whilst you could argue that array_rand_key is a better name, I have chosen
array_pick because it is shorter, and has a similar name to similar functions in
Python (random.choice) and GML (choose)
- However, this could be changed.
---
Thoughts?
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
ray_rand(). One for a key, one for a
value.
- The name isn't logical
- Whilst you could argue that array_rand_key is a better name, I have chosen
array_pick because it is shorter, and has a similar name to similar functions in
Python (random.choice) and GML (choose)
- However, this could
On 24/07/12 14:40, Levi Morrison wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Laruence wrote:
Hi:
As the previous threads disscussed, I make a implemention.
here is the RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/finally
any suggestions?
Th
On 24/07/12 14:48, Johannes Schlüter wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 19:20 +0800, Laruence wrote:
Hi:
As the previous threads disscussed, I make a implemention.
here is the RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/finally
any suggestions?
thanks
As PHP has destructors there is less need fo
On 24/07/12 16:16, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 07/24/2012 06:35 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Laruence wrote:
Hi:
As the previous threads disscussed, I make a implemention.
here is the RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/finally
any suggestions?
The finally
s2) as Alias2, ... ;". //Perhaps this is
just a formatting issue (with newlines it would be more clear), but it
looks a little weird to me.
Just my 2¢.
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
en I remembered somebody already wrote Python! :)
PHP risks losing some of its uniqueness to fixing things, unfortunately.
But losing bad features and moving forward is good, right?
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: htt
mentation of an iterator, why
do we need to have it as _function_?
Much easier to make an iterator with a function than as a class.
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
esting PHP do things because Python does them. I'm just
saying that 1) keeping things because they've always been done one way
is not a good reason to keep them, and 2) just because Python does the
same or a similar thing, does not mean PHP is "turning into Python".
--
Andrew
On 24/07/12 18:56, Alex Aulbach wrote:
2012/7/24 Andrew Faulds :
Much easier to make an iterator with a function than as a class.
2012/7/24 Yahav Gindi Bar :
I agree, implementing a class only for iterator may be pain sometimes, and
functions is much better - especially when 5.3 got the
;m open to any new nicely-written generator syntax.
On 24 ביול 2012, at 20:56, Alex Aulbach wrote:
2012/7/24 Andrew Faulds :
Much easier to make an iterator with a function than as a class.
2012/7/24 Yahav Gindi Bar :
I agree, implementing a class only for iterator may be pain sometimes, and
On 24/07/12 19:32, Alex Aulbach wrote:
2012/7/24 Andrew Faulds :
But PHP functions usually have side-effects, they aren't strict mathematical
functions.
Ah, you might mean str_tok()? Are there more, do you have a list?
But we're in PHP-programming-context. You write a function i
s from context these aren't ordinary functions, IMO.
And anyway, what could possibly go wrong? Is there any incorrect but
non-fatal or warning-generating way you could use them?
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Like they have already... :/
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
> ( I'll start a new thread for my other rant ... )
nah, you won't, you will bring that up in every thread instead.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Generators aren't for you, then, they are for people like me who, for example,
used a C# generator for yielding tokens, or, for example, use generators to
iterate element by element through multi-dimensional arrays.
--
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
Lester Caine
or. Please
explain how people will end up using generators like normal functions without
causing some kind of error or exception. I don't see where the problem is?
--
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
Alex Aulbach wrote:
null
We, of course, should try to avoid user confusion if it will be a big issue.
But I don't see any here.
Also, 20 years experience does not necessarily a good programmer make, nor an
expert in other programmers.
--
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
Sherif Ramadan
to use it. Did the
introduction of short array syntax force you to use [] instead of array()?!
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 25/07/12 16:11, Lester Caine wrote:
Andrew Faulds wrote:
I top you 20 years with 37 years. I was programming in Algol in 1975
( at
Warwick university ). I'm not a programmer, I'm a hardware engineer
who has to
program to make systems work. I added PHP 12 years ago to create
Is there a PHP 6 wiki page for co-ordinating development of and
collecting ideas for PHP6 development?
There are a lot of idea being thrown around, would be nice if we had a
page (there might be one, but I can't find it).
Thanks.
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals
at life, so obviously I'm an expert
at it, right?
I don't see how it means anything.
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 25/07/12 16:43, Alex Aulbach wrote:
2012/7/25 Andrew Faulds :
We, of course, should try to avoid user confusion if it will be a big issue.
But I don't see any here.
I said it's small and the fix is small also. Big issue, big fix, small
issue, small fix. Understand?
Also
ally how much, more
*what* experience you have that I think really matters here.
--
Andrew Faulds
http://ajf.me/
1 - 100 of 378 matches
Mail list logo
