Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40399
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.20.128 cause and error)
Message-ID: <48C63165.1030504@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 09:18:45 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080313 SeaMonkey/1.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <48C5F612.6090001@lsces.co.uk> <48C60671.4040608@chiaraquartet.net>	 <48C6120E.6020606@lsces.co.uk> <7f3ed2c30809090025y20593cdo3218e9ec959f92f2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7f3ed2c30809090025y20593cdo3218e9ec959f92f2@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: 5.3 Backwards Compatibility
From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine)

Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 08:05, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
>> Trying to follow on from 'scratchpad' using php.net search
>> namespace - not found - AH - namespaces ...
> 
> Fixed, but why don't you try to raise this issue on remotely closer
> mailinglist or bug report?
> 
>> goto not found
> Help appreciated.
'Over my dead body' comes to mind ;)
The NOTES (2005?) I have relating to this do cover the intended plan, but in 
order to document it one needs to know how it was actually implemented? It's 
not something I would consider using, but as soon as it appears in libraries 
one has to understand how it works if one gets dragged in by faults. However 
if the original plan have been followed, then it's not actually goto is it?

>> Closure - not found
> 
> "The RFC can serve as documentation until someone can document it" is
> the new cool today.
> 
>> Don't have time to spend hours finding the information. It takes long enough
> 
> Happ shittens.
> Any and all help is very appreciated.

Greg's blanket - It's in the manual was simply wrong?
TESTING new features requires that we know that they are there and how they 
work? But raising a lot more bugs for things that ARE still being padded out 
is not the right way of getting the information so we can test? The current 
problem is that a lot of the material has NOT been pushed back to php.net yet 
- it still says that is to be done ... so one has to find these extra bits.

5.3.0 has not been released yet, and where data IS in the manual it's marked 
as 'experimental' ( namespaces ... ) so what is a more appropriate list for 
matters relating to getting 5.3.0 out of the door in a format that we can 
actually use?

I'm trying to keep a copy of 5.3 running along side my production 5.2 machines 
in order to test things out, and I have a list of things which need 'fixing' 
in the applications I am using *IF* I'm to use 5.3 in production, but that 
can't happen until it leaves 'internals' and becomes a version actually 
supported on the other lists? For the moment I keep watching here and checking 
for updates to the information.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php