Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:43288 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 45709 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 10:32:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Mar 2009 10:32:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rquadling@googlemail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rquadling@googlemail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 209.85.128.185 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rquadling@googlemail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.128.185 fk-out-0910.google.com Received: from [209.85.128.185] ([209.85.128.185:43000] helo=fk-out-0910.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 53/4A-30036-BC146B94 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 05:32:44 -0500 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b27so641243fka.7 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 03:32:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ncmVL7i8CC4KEJqqiK8LWe0XFt+a4pNHPqKtZZdXH8U=; b=q5xWkb5oD/4MJSHRzaV30f3KrzUcXWvelaDDBJklniwFQo9YiS2tuhRAimBfuIDswK QeHF0Cac/bYdgIlrfm6KdWmpqUqd34qAfT1X0tEXDMuCUi0iYKbTVo/G4PnKNVAbp4u7 3ljF8/TE/L6Jz/BLlQy/XXRb2phxpCLVBEt2c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=gWYZtZcMGh21thtmz6dQS4sFW3heytGCzJRrvSNVgonsfwSsAoYYZBhr/19rabF/tR fEVAGe4qw+KBEZx0S+794bLVXVDD/xoqAf3iKzqSBL0MvsRKlRGWZIFIkXCZchvo4azU MECN0xZ86s53+fTf5g2zim1gtvkcHk8hrmdsA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.120.197 with SMTP id e5mr5214773far.25.1236681160939; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 03:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: RQuadling@googlemail.com In-Reply-To: <49AC0CB7.6@macvicar.net> References: <10845a340903020821v718bc762g243864f7e098ee1c@mail.gmail.com> <49AC08EA.5000105@macvicar.net> <10845a340903020836u67ba1600qd4be7101f4256863@mail.gmail.com> <49AC0CB7.6@macvicar.net> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:32:40 +0000 Message-ID: <10845a340903100332v32aaa2bbs20316c2aea7738a5@mail.gmail.com> To: Scott MacVicar Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Patch and test cases too for From: rquadling@googlemail.com (Richard Quadling) 2009/3/2 Scott MacVicar : > Richard Quadling wrote: >> 2009/3/2 Scott MacVicar : >>> Richard Quadling wrote: >>>> Hi. >>>> >>>> Regarding http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=47493, I've supplied a patch >>>> to the unit tests too. >>>> >>>> Any chance this could get committed to 5.2+ >>>> >>> I'm too convinced of the parameter name and I don't think its something >>> that should be added to 5.2.9 since its a feature. >>> >>> Scott >>> >> >> 5.3+ would be OK then. >> >> As to the param name, I'm not actually changing the name, just adding >> another flag. >> >> In javascript's terminology,the output is an array ... >> >> [] >> >> or a hash >> >> {} >> >> So forcing a hash for arrays is pretty much what would be wanted and I >> as I comment in the request, we have a "force" option when coming FROM >> json data ... json_decode ( string $json [, bool $assoc= false [, int >> $depth= 512 ]] ) >> >> And the "name" of the param here is appropriate to PHP's use (assoc is >> not part of JSON's or JS's terminology). >> >> If you can think of a better name for the flag, then I'd be glad to use it. >> > > The JSON spec refers to them as arrays or objects though, as does our > documentation I believe. > > PHP_JSON_FORCE_OBJECT > > I however have another patch for more strict encoding so I'll try to > roll this in a single update. > > Scott > First of all, this isn't a "why is this not done yet" message. Honestly. Do you have any timeframe for this though? Do you think it will be ready for 5.3RC1? Thank you, Richard Quadling. -- ----- Richard Quadling Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731 "Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"