Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:20647 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37034 invoked by uid 1010); 27 Nov 2005 11:15:39 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37018 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2005 11:15:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Nov 2005 11:15:38 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.46.255.21 viefep18-int.chello.at Solaris 8 (1) Received: from ([213.46.255.21:11384] helo=viefep18-int.chello.at) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id CE/DA-56276-95599834 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:15:38 -0500 Received: from genuine ([80.108.128.16]) by viefep18-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.6.01.04.04 201-2131-118-104-20050224) with ESMTP id <20051127111533.MRUF15626.viefep18-int.chello.at@genuine> for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:15:33 +0100 Received: from laptop.home ([192.168.1.50]) by genuine with esmtpa (Exim 4.50) id 1EgKOX-0005oT-Kk for internals@lists.php.net; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:08:33 +0100 Message-ID: <43899587.5050209@fischer.name> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:16:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050317 Thunderbird/1.0.2 Mnenhy/0.7.2.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -27 X-Spam-Level: -- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "genuine", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Kevin Brown wrote: > The only scripts that would break (far from "trillions") here would be > those where you had a space-less ternary statement comparing two > constants (NOT namespace constants -- they don't even exist yet), as > in the following case: > > define('foo','odd'); > define('bar','even'); > $var = rand() % 2 == 1 ? foo:bar; [...] Content analysis details: (-2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.8 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: PHP 5.1 (Or How to break tousands of apps out there) From: markus@fischer.name (Markus Fischer) Kevin Brown wrote: > The only scripts that would break (far from "trillions") here would be > those where you had a space-less ternary statement comparing two > constants (NOT namespace constants -- they don't even exist yet), as > in the following case: > > define('foo','odd'); > define('bar','even'); > $var = rand() % 2 == 1 ? foo:bar; Do we have a way getting numbers on how high the probability is that someone is using two constants in the ternary operator without spaces? Would "major PHP open source" projects count? Probably not, because they don't represent the majority of ordinary PHP users. I mean, comparing this to the current problem with the new date class, it seems that it is much more unlikely that this is out there (but it will be, definitely, and it will affect "some" users, definitely) then a date class, that even from my users point of view ("upgrading php is almost always pain because of BC problems") I would go for Jessies implementation. sincerly, - Markus