Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:36015 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 77499 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2008 18:12:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Mar 2008 18:12:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=stas@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=stas@zend.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 63.205.162.114 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: stas@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 63.205.162.114 unknown Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 Received: from [63.205.162.114] ([63.205.162.114:45481] helo=us-ex1.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 69/97-38880-E0430D74 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:12:30 -0500 Received: from [192.168.16.115] ([192.168.16.115]) by us-ex1.zend.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:12:45 -0800 Message-ID: <47D0340D.4070301@zend.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:12:29 -0800 Organization: Zend Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cristian Rodriguez CC: php-dev References: <1204823427.30934.9.camel@goldfinger.johannes.nop> <47D02B84.8020009@daylessday.org> <7d5a202f0803061002k6e27f736vb292c315c3a5fb7c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7d5a202f0803061002k6e27f736vb292c315c3a5fb7c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Mar 2008 18:12:45.0721 (UTC) FILETIME=[AD879090:01C87FB5] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.3 Release Planning From: stas@zend.com (Stanislav Malyshev) Hi! > Also will be nice if zend.enable_gc ini setting is dropped as well > before it is too late , having yet another ini setting that alters the > engine behaviuor looks pretty much like the repeating the same old > mistakes over and over again. Does it alter the engine behaviour? I was under impression the behavior is the same, just the moment when memory is reclaimed has changed. Does it mean there's code that works differently with GC than without? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com