Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:26849 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 481 invoked by uid 1010); 8 Dec 2006 18:19:14 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 466 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2006 18:19:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 8 Dec 2006 18:19:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=iliaal@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=iliaal@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=good Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 64.233.162.231 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: good X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: iliaal@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.233.162.231 nz-out-0506.google.com Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from [64.233.162.231] ([64.233.162.231:40483] helo=nz-out-0102.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 93/A5-64559-C5CA9754 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:18:39 -0500 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id k1so657185nzf for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:18:02 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=Ni3N5fT6pq8/gGwY1pAxfRoLNHBDw6ZkDuBx16uRGmUaqsRlQM47XCTAiXEXcB9HG+21VlpvJJQzpIDOmv9smaY6FXSUZGm+opXNdOPLSaUUlRXGyIha/HgASD+IYuYI3hG6/1ldW+gthPh0Dc2pq/f8Q0ck/Usvxjz+FrtjuJg= Received: by 10.64.208.20 with SMTP id f20mr6205776qbg.1165601881862; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:18:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.6? ( [74.108.69.82]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f13sm3206600qba.2006.12.08.10.18.01; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:18:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4579A890.3040706@zend.com> References: <3B40503A-75F6-41EC-BFCF-56D777501FA5@prohost.org> <4579A890.3040706@zend.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-ID: <18DC7BB8-CE6D-4EFD-87DE-E0BF237284F8@prohost.org> Cc: PHP internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:17:53 -0500 To: Stanislav Malyshev X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Sender: Ilia Alshanetsky Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Moving COM, Socket & mhash to PECL From: ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) On 8-Dec-06, at 1:01 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> COM: >> Un-maintained at this time and has a fairly serious number of >> bugs (26 by latest count, many of which are crashes) > > I don't think COM should be moved out. Right, it's windows only - > but if you are on windows, COM extension is most useful (I used it > a number of times and it's really amazing how easily you can do > various data processing stuff if you combine power of PHP with, for > example, Excel). As for bugs, they certainly need some attention, > only moving it to PECL is not going to do them any better :) And as > far as I can see, COM extension does not consume any significant > resources. So I don't think it's a good idea to move it out. Well, it does not consume any resources simply because no one is maintaining it ;-). How really different things would be if it were in pecl? I mean afaik COM is not enabled by default on win32, so you still need to enable it manually. So, the only extra step for people who want to use it would be to download it from pecl4win. This updates extensions more frequently then we do releases, so it'd actually give people the ability to get a more stable version (assuming bug fixes are made) far sooner then they'd be able to otherwise. >> mhash: >> Everything this extension that relies on an external lib to >> do, is already done by hash extension that is enabled by default >> and requires no external libs. There is simply no reason to keep >> it around. > > Sounds convincing to me. Only thing I see is that manual right now > does not give clear idea of what algorithms hash extension > supports. It's not an argument against moving mhash out but > suggestion for improvement :) There is a list on http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.hash- algos.php, but I agree that we need a clearer list on the main page of the docs for the hash extension. >> sockets: >> Un-maintained. >> Majority of what it can do can already by done via streams in >> a much more consistent and stable fashion. > > The I guess it's ok to move it to 6.0 but I don't think it's ok for > 5.2 since there's a potential for people using it in apps and > streams has quite different API so it'd require significant rewrite > if people want to use it with standard PHP. Thus, not good to > change it in minor version. A good point for 5.2, but given that there is no one to support users using this extension if people start using that extension they potentially leading themselves to a dead-end. Given how far the streams have gone lately I do not believe that there is any interest in maintaining this extension any further. Ilia Alshanetsky