Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39236 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 60445 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2008 16:53:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Jul 2008 16:53:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=helly@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=helly@php.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: helly@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 85.214.94.56 aixcept.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [85.214.94.56] ([85.214.94.56:40067] helo=h1149922.serverkompetenz.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 0E/AB-12534-3F167884 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:53:09 -0400 Received: from host95.paramount.wayport.net (unknown [65.249.24.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by h1149922.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3150711DAD8; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:53:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:52:58 +0200 Reply-To: Marcus Boerger X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1736835338.20080723185258@marcus-boerger.de> To: Lukas Kahwe Smith CC: PHP Developers Mailing List In-Reply-To: <161BC537-BBB8-4B73-B573-4BBA080CF743@pooteeweet.org> References: <161BC537-BBB8-4B73-B573-4BBA080CF743@pooteeweet.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.3 feature freeze rapidly approaching From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger) Hello Lukas, Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 1:26:00 PM, you wrote: > Hi, > This is just a reminder from your friendly co-RMs that the PHP 5.3 > feature freeze is rapidly approaching: > http://wiki.php.net/todo/php53 > As you can see there are still a bunch of open topics. For the very > important ones we have tried to contact the authors and work out a > schedule to get them done. If there is anything missing on this list > please make sure to let us know _ASAP_ (or forever hold your peace). > Please try to get your items done today or over the course of tomorrow > (we are not giving a specific timezone, but try for sooner rather than > later ..). Once we have reached the 25th, we will start being a bit > more strict, so again please make sure we know about the things you > want to do (this includes bug fixes - which we might deem feature > changes) so that things will go smoothly for an alpha1 on the 31st. > Thank you all for the work that has been done in the past weeks. > Things are shaping up nicely. My main worry point atm is that we are > not sure about the status of re2c. After alpha1 I will release a new re2c version: 0.14.0. I also have to do a few internal API changes: - exception handling, two new functions and a modified one plus a structure change. All of these changes deal with mem leaks in exception handling. However I haven't fixed all issues yet. - changing the error mode needs to be changed as well. Right now a function that uses this and calls a function that uses this as well will have wrong error handling mode after the inner call returns. And then there are these: - should we finally change: typedef int (*apply_func_args_t)(void *pDest, int num_args, va_list args, zend_hash_key *hash_key); to typedef int (*apply_func_args_t)(void *pDest TSRMLS_DC, int num_args, va_list args, zend_hash_key *hash_key); so that we can drop a bunch of TSRMLS_FETCH()'es. - should we use the alpha time to constify our c level API? I recently came across this while building PHP on another machine with C++ extensions and it is a major pain in the ass. Basically we have to disallow any help the compiler could give us. We might even find one or the other reall error doing so. Best regards, Marcus