Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48672 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 57062 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2010 17:34:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Jun 2010 17:34:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.113 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.113 smtp113.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.113] ([67.192.241.113:48659] helo=smtp113.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 46/B7-17184-1CD2D0C4 for ; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:34:58 -0400 Received: from relay21.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay21.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id C9F1A2E404AD; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by relay21.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 888F42E404A7; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4C0D2DBE.9040305@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:34:54 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Felipe Pena , PHP Internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Array Dereferencing From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > RFC page: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/functionarraydereferencing > > The patch is simple, it just required to change the grammar file. I also > added some tests in the patch. > This is great. Did you check it on debug version though? I thought for some reason you'd have to take care of freeing the value (which is returned by function) after the expression is done, but maybe I missed something. It's be also nice to see some more assignment tests (also maybe return-array-by-ref test). -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227