Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35065 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 92388 invoked by uid 1010); 1 Feb 2008 06:00:15 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 92372 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2008 06:00:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 1 Feb 2008 06:00:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=fujimoto@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=fujimoto@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 219.94.145.87 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: fujimoto@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 219.94.145.87 sx.eth.jp Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from [219.94.145.87] ([219.94.145.87:40006] helo=sx.eth.jp) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id EE/D3-29409-D65B2A74 for ; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:00:14 -0500 Received: by sx.eth.jp (Postfix, from userid 1006) id B7CA5B3147; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 15:00:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from fujimoto-001.local (sx.eth.jp [127.0.0.1]) by sx.eth.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C444FB3191; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 15:00:07 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <47A2B569.5050503@php.net> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:00:09 +0900 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcus Boerger Cc: internals@lists.php.net References: <47A1E22B.6020200@php.net> <1679569193.20080131172735@marcus-boerger.de> In-Reply-To: <1679569193.20080131172735@marcus-boerger.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Unsure, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.500000, version=0.94.4 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [patch] zend_call_method_with_N_params() From: fujimoto@php.net (Masaki Fujimoto) it seems really unfortunate...:) but I understand your reasons, and then I'm looking forward to fixes in 5.3 or 6. thank you! Marcus Boerger wrotes: > Hello Masaki, > > unfortunately we cannot use any C99 extension and must stick to C89. > Also I do not really see a reason to use ... in the actual function > definition. The reason for the way the function is written, is to avoid > using emalloc. Now, we can probably live with up to four parameters for > PHP 5.3 and HEAD. But we cannot allow this in 5.2 as it would be an API > change. So if you can comeup with a change that will simply add two > parameters for zend_call_method() and provide the two additionla macros > as well as fixing the ones being present already then *I* think it is > fine. > > marcus > > Thursday, January 31, 2008, 3:58:51 PM, you wrote: > >> hello marcus, > >> after a long interval, I've restarted to hack PHP and ZE again, and I >> found that zend_call_method could take only 2 args at most...(I just >> wanted to call methods w/ 3 or more args in my extensions:) > >> I think we can easily rewrite this w/ va_list, and since most of the >> extensions are call zend_call_method() via zend_call_method_with* macro >> so that no BC breaking things will happen. > >> # AFAIK only spl use zend_call_method() directly and perhaps we can >> easily sync w/ updated interfaces (TSRM fixes will do) > >> pathces are here: >> [PHP_5_2 / PHP_5_3] >> http://labs.gree.jp/data/patch/zend_interfaces_var_list.php_5_2.patch > >> [HEAD] >> http://labs.gree.jp/data/patch/zend_interfaces_var_list.head.patch > >> # C99 feature (__VA_ARGS__) is used in my patch for HEAD...(is it >> acceptable?) > >> if this is ok, it's much appreciated if you apply these patches. thank you. > >> -- >> Masaki Fujimoto >> > > > > > Best regards, > Marcus > -- Masaki Fujimoto