allow getting invidual docblock
> tags
I am a low man on this totem pole, and have no karma at all, but I have to say
that makes a great deal of sense to me. Right now, for documenting a codebase,
I parse the docblocks in userland to extract @tags. Adding that capability to
the Reflection class
it, pro-actvely or
otherwise.
My contempt for this terrible, horrible, very bad, no-good RFC is unlimited.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
"the offender". *This* is why the
RFC is awful, horrible, anti-free-speech, etc. It abides no concept of liberty
to speak.
The RFC is virtue-signaling for a particular political persuasion, and nothing
more.
It does serve one useful purpose: to help identify who wants to be
rse: that this is being discussed in the first place,
or that there are so many willing volunteer speech police around to support it.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
ht
arly I don't know what "safe" means here.
Explain yourself.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Dev
oversight, based on their own whims. The "respect" bit
is a velvet glove on an iron fist.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PH
needs to be applied. If it rises
to the level of needing *due process* then the police should be involved.
There's no need, *none at all*, for a star chamber *or* a mob to be an amenable
authority to salve someone's hurt feelings and ban someone else, not even in a
temporary capaci
finitions, no oversight, just straight up "the will of the star chamber."
It's naked power masquerading as care-and-respect.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 22:31, Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>> This RFC is not about "respect." It is about a cabal being able to ban at
>> will, without supervision or oversight, based on their own whims. The
>
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 22:32, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>
> Really, the core portion of this RFC that reveals how it will be used, is
> this:
>
>> Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to to ban temporarily
>> or
>> permanently any contributor f
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 22:42, Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> Formalized rules and due process are terrible for a free and open society?
This proposal is neither formalized, nor due process. You're great at C, Sara,
but you're horrible at law.
OMG WAS THAT OFFENSIVE? BAN BAN BAN!
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 22:46, Sara Golemon wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>> No definitions, no oversight, just straight up "the will of the star
>>> chamber." It's naked power masquerading as care-and-respect.
>
dissident
opinion is categorized as "virulent hate." You writing this proves the point I
am making: this RFC is political in nature, entirely and only.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solv
> On Jan 5, 2016, at 09:55, Ben Ramsey wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 4, 2016, at 10:29 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>
>> If there's an accusation, then *due process* needs to be applied. If it
>> rises to the level of needing *due process* then the police should b
drama's sake). We should be careful about that term and use it
> appropriately.
This is one of the reasons I like you, Anthony, and I appreciate your
understanding.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/ml
uot; document, while still not that great, is orders of magnitude better
than this RFC. It at least leads in the direction of people solving their own
problems, rather than appealing to amenable authority and thus remaining
dependents on it for all time.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
ht
ntributor Covenant in particular),
> and the people typically agitating for them, come from a place of
> hyper-politicization.
Yes, that is an accurate summary of my position.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 22:29, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 4, 2016, at 21:48, Michael Cullum wrote:
>>
>> I do apologise for saying offender, it was the wrong word to use there
For the record: accepted. The COC is a speech-policing code, so if it passes,
ex
the-developer-formerly-known-as-freebsdgirl/
And here's a timely reference from the other side of that argument.
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2015-June/266479.html
If one presents only the one side, that of the accuser, that might be
problematic. It's eve
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>>
>>>
>> Maybe Sarah and Paul and with that we covered every angle :)
>
> Paul?
Sure, I'll bite.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
ht
going to be as constructive as possible
at blocking it.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing Li
rvably less fascist in its binding-together
of the personal, political, and project. It still needs work but it's a better
starting point than the horrific Contributor Covenant.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
hreats* I report them to the police. Thankfully that has been rare.
I reiterate: the Code-of-Conduct as presented, and specifically the Contributor
Covenant, is political protection for certain political views, overly broad in
its scope, totalitarian speech-policing in practice, and to be dismissed
sake.
Noted, and appreciated.
> However, I wanted to reply to one rhetorical question:
>
> Paul M. Jones wrote on 06/01/2016 15:52:
>>> And that's just me. I know for a fact that several other people have
>>> >had incidents. I know that several people avoid int
.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
;if brought to your
attention, heed it", etc. etc.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 13:38, Ryan Pallas wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>
> > On Jan 6, 2016, at 13:13, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> >
> > Furthermore, if people think the CoC enforcement team have been too
> > heavy
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 14:21, Tom Worster wrote:
>
> On 1/6/16, 2:35 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote:
>
>>> On Jan 6, 2016, at 12:54, Tom Worster wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it's perhaps too general to be of great use to us here but The
>>
r will most likely use non php.net's channel.
In which case there are existing means at their disposal: blocking, muting,
junk-foldering, reporting to the channel owner for abuse, etc. If the harasser
cannot actually reach their target, does that not have the same effect?
--
Paul M. Jo
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:37, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:17, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>>
>>> If someone starts to put bad pressure on another person (harassment,
>>>
Once they have blocked/muted/junk-foldered the person-that-is-harassing, there
will have been little for them to see in the first place.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 12:14, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 10:47, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>>
>>> Are you saying that a person has his place in php.net after being proven
>&
to read "employee" as "contributor/participant" and "employer" as
"the project" in this case.)
But anything less? No, the project's responsibility is only to enforce its
policies on its own communication channels.
Do you feel otherwise?
--
Paul M.
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 14:31, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
>
> On 7 January 2016 at 20:12, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>
>> If the activity in question rises to the level of filing a petition for *and
>> being granted* a restraining order, *then and only then* might the project
>
ht the project have some responsibility to help enforce
that order, since the project itself may become subject to a lawsuit or other
legal actions.
I can clarify further if you have specific questions.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
ht
ad several people reach out to
me who would like to comment against the RFC, but are unwilling to do so
because they fear for their jobs; i.e., being "disemployed" for their opinions.
Think about *that* for a while.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
want to make a false accusation as an
attack to get their target banned, the false accuser can create those accounts
themselves and start projecting a harassment campaign where none exists. So
even the existence of alternative accounts used to continue otherwise-blocked
communications is
-project channels, be my guest, and you can enjoy the results (good
or bad) for yourselves.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals
is to be a response team, let it be
randomly selected on per-reported-incident basis from the pool of voters. Then
there is no possibility of a charge of continuing bias, and it distributes
power among the pool, instead of concentrating it into a few members.
Proponents of the response team:
so.
Overall, I still assert that a reporter should not know in advance who will
handle their report, other than "5 randomly chosen voting members" (similar to
a jury pool).
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanp
> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfield wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you think we can find 5 people in the PHP community that we can trust to
>>> make fair d
> On Jan 8, 2016, at 13:07, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Paul M. Jones [mailto:pmjone...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 7:28 PM
>> To: Larry Garfield
>> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
>> Subject: Re: [PH
> On Jan 8, 2016, at 13:50, Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> On 1/8/16 12:31 PM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>> On Jan 8, 2016, at 12:16, Larry Garfield wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/8/16 11:28 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 23:52, Larry Garfi
speech-policing code. It is terrible,
horrible, no-good, very bad piece of work. You want to ban me now for being
"aggressive"?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem
>
> On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 9, 2016 10:16 PM, "Paul M. Jones" wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Jan 8, 2016, at 23:25, Pierre Joye wrote:
> > >
> > > Paul's early reply in this thread were over
hus either confirming or disconfirming the
hypothesis.
Of course, that's just one approach that "logic" might use. Do you feel the
approach to the COC has been "logical" in that sense? If not in that sense,
then in what other sense do you feel it has been "logic
> On Jan 10, 2016, at 11:03, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Anthony,
>
>> On Jan 9, 2016, at 21:48, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
>
> [Regarding supported of the COC as presented]
>
>> We've been trying to discuss logic.
>
> I think "logic"
> On Jan 9, 2016, at 19:39, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Bishop Bettini wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 9, 2016, at 09:43, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>>>
t."
If that's to be the case, I don't recall seeing explicit definitions of
"project member" and "represent". Perhaps I have missed them? They're needed so
as to limit the scope-of-action to what Anthony states above.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmai
ar to 4/5 means conversational volume will increase only for RFCs
that already have very high support, which is probably not the intended
consequence of raising the bar.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mla
sal, they were the minority from
> what I could tell.
>
> tl;dr; - Even if you could never find a more wretched hive of scum and
> villainy than PHP internals, I (and my others) would still not support the
> proposed CoC.
To quote Larry, "^^ This."
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone
("Create the RFC") ?
<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto>
At the very least, it seems like an initial email needs to be sent before
putting the RFC on the wiki.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.co
ibutor Covenant is a political document,
the politics of those who favor it are fair game. Also, your attempt to
characterize "quoting someone's own words" as "personal attacks" is noted.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Le
f the many reasons the Contributor Covenant, and all
documents like it, should be removed in toto from any Code of Conduct
discussion.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
htt
e one's own *agreement* known only once.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsu
is not, then why do we think
"attacks" of this kind are a problem to be addressed?
Finally, these are Guidelines, but for whom? Is their violation actionable? If
so, by whom, and in what circumstances? If not, then the Guidelines should say
so.
I have other issues, but those will do fo
sting DI systems,
such as Aura.Di, rely on those for creating objects.)
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjone...@gmail.com
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
limits. What are those things?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit
$foo->getBar(); // 1
```
Perhaps something like that is worth adopting here.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
hat the PHP internals team make
> decisions.
"Make decisions" on what specific topics? Is there any articulable limiting
principle here?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N
oderators, with the power to ban and to silence, become the owners of the
project whose communications they moderate. By controlling the flow of
information in a project, moderators control the status of the members in that
project, and thereby control the direction of the project.
--
Paul M. J
nals@
> productive again.
I think there is quite a bit of "common sense and human decency" in play here
already, even if not universal and uninterrupted -- nobody on this list is an
angel, though some are more devilish than others.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://
> On Sep 23, 2019, at 09:16, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
>
> On 23.09.2019 at 15:55, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>
>> Ah, if only that were true. No, moderators have the power to act
>> immediately, whereas any oversight regarding them can act only slowly, with
>> de
a for the RFC may not be the best one ever, and
> equally grievous sins, and somehow make it look as if these people are
> somehow against the community by the mere fact that somebody felt they
> are "disruptive". There's no need of any "framework" for such thing.
He
> On Jan 8, 2020, at 05:42, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> Hi internals,
>
> I would like to propose the following RFC, which allows using "static" as a
> return type:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_return_type
Very happy to see this.
--
Paul M. Jone
n if it's a *related* community.)
So, the way to get voting rights on Internals is to actually contribute
something to Internals -- whether code or docs. There has to be *some* barrier
to to pass, that is specific to that community.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.c
ist of,
currently eligible voters?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubs
ns are an additional prerequisite to getting a vote.
Ben (and others) -- your thoughts? Is it really as straightforward as "having a
php.net account alone is enough to be eligible to vote" ?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in P
ht here, perhaps even point to the
code that determines if a wiki user is allowed to vote?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals
Hi --
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 14:15, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> Yes, having a php.net account is sufficient. Additionally there are 28
> users in the wiki in the "phpcvs" group, which I *think* means they can
> also vote.
Ah, very good -- thanks for that!
--
Paul M. Jone
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 16:58, Levi Morrison via internals
> wrote:
>
> We are predominantly volunteers, and should keep that in mind for
> these kinds of things.
Hear, hear.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applicatio
alse.
*That's* the kind of thing I had I mind. Good find!
Anyone have ideas on how (or from where) the `$INFO['userinfo']['grps']` values
get populated?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://l
g on it.
That sounds like a lot of work; best of luck!
Note also that there is https://phpinternals.net/ which I have found useful.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PH
Hi all,
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 06:22, Nicolas Grekas
> wrote:
>
> Thank you for being open to the discussion and reconsidering! I\'ll do
> my best to deserve the support I\'ve received :)
Say, was there any resolution on this, one way or the other?
--
Paul M. Jone
acement for HttpFoundation or PSR-7,
or as a model of HTTP messages, but as an object-oriented alternative to
superglobals, header(), setcookie(), setrawcookie(), and so on.
Thanks in advance for your time and consideration while evaluating it.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://pau
'PHP_AUTH_PW' from
the password, and 'HTTP_AUTH_PW' from the header. ServerRequest only populates
PHP_AUTH_PW into $authPw; the HTTP_AUTH_PW value would (per the above
description) go into $request->headers['auth-pw'].
I hope that made sense; let me know if it
o core, this RFC must
therefore be allowed into core" but to say "those objections alone were not a
barrier to PDO, so they alone should not be a barrier to this RFC".
I hope that's an understandable counterargument, even if you don't agree with
it.
--
Paul M. Jones
t be behavioral nuances between the two, but the point is that you
can still do filtering.
> Would you not also add an option to generate a warning when using them for
> those who want to deprecate their use in their own code (deprecating across
> the board would be too extreme give how
o that presented by PHP itself; far from being "API of the
year" it honors existing PHP functionality quite closely.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://lea
hough
at the same time, I am wary of expanding the number of new declarations too
much.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Inter
hy pollute the global namespace if you
> don't need them?
I share Harald's opinion here. I think a .ini setting to disable superglobals
and the response-related functions is out-of-scope for this RFC.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legac
cts: how will this handle PUT / php:://input / raw posted data? Or am i
> missing something?
Answer: the php://input stream is accessible via the ServerRequest $content
property; see <https://github.com/pmjones/ext-request#content-related>.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
htt
ist approach of arrays for this RFC; the
"effort-to-benefit" ratio is much better.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
::__construct($globals, $content);
if ($this->forwarded) {
$this->clientIp = // ...
}
}
public function getClientIp()
{
return $this->clientIp;
}
}
You could do that for all your custom calcula
If many others disagree with that assessment, I'm happy to entertain the
possibility of adding something like it to ServerRequest.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
http
;> them intimately.)
>>
>> That seems a bit much at this point. ;-)
>
> Really? Seems like this and some guard code is all it would take:
>
> ini_set( "disallow_superglobals", true);
Even if that's true (and I think that example masks some complexity) I must
get to $query, populating it from `$globals['_GET']`, on the basis
stated above
- rename $post to $input, populating it from `$globals['_POST']`, on the basis
that it typically relates to the parsed form of php://input
Your (and/or anyone else's) thoughts on that?
--
Pa
to me; it seems a little close to $content. I've also been
thinking about $values, $params, $parsedContent, $contentValues, $bodyValues,
$contentArray, and other variations with and without prefixes and suffixes, but
$input is the one that feels like the least-terrible alternative to $post for
nter-argument, are here:
<https://externals.io/message/108436#108493>
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
20:10:30 GMT+00:00, "Paul M. Jones"
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>> On Feb 15, 2020, at 02:01, Larry Garfield
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ... is this proposal intended to supplant HttpFoundation and PSR-7
>>> ... ?
>>
>>
Hi Côme,
> On Feb 18, 2020, at 03:24, Côme Chilliet
> wrote:
>
> Le jeudi 13 février 2020, 09:16:49 CET Paul M. Jones a écrit :
>
>> Yeah, naming is one of the hard problems. I considered $query as an
>> alternative property name for $get, but in the end, the `$_GE
g that no other implementations, across many
years and many authors, have actually found a need for.
Any further thoughts on this?
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https
questions yet to be resolved.
Thanks to everyone who has participated thus far!
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - P
t; If this object took a more opinionated view of what behaviour to encapsulate,
> we could simply hide the "server" array completely. Common use cases would be
> exposed via methods, and rarer use cases would have to be added in userland
> with their own copy of $_SERVER. Th
you correctly point out, it is global.)
> if you look at pretty much any existing Request wrapper, it will make some
> attempt to extract a URL from the $_SERVER array. That really feels like a
> missing feature of this one right now.
Yeah, my bad on not documenting it earlier -- please c
who have already provided such valuable
feedback!
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https://leanpub.com/mlaphp
Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP
https://leanpub.com/sn1php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
extension,
with documentation and tests.
Further, one evaluator noted that ServerResponseSender::sendContent() did not
allow for iterables/generators as content; that has been remedied as well.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.com
Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP
https
> On Feb 20, 2020, at 18:42, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>
>> On Feb 20, 2020, at 10:26 AM, Paul M. Jones wrote:
>>
>> One of the "open questions" on this RFC is: are the class names
>> ServerRequest, ServerResponse, and ServerResponseSender "good eno
ation with Niklas, he notes some future conditions under
which the API as presented might work with async (e.g. the arrival of fibers)
-- but until that time, async is best left out-of-scope. I have updated the RFC
to that effect.
--
Paul M. Jones
pmjo...@pmjones.io
http://paul-m-jones.co
nted approach around request and response functionality already
existing in PHP, in order to reduce the global mutable state problems that come
with superglobals and the various response-related functions."
So it's not that the RFC proposes a "simpler" way to use the superglob
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
