Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:4925 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67990 invoked by uid 1010); 22 Oct 2003 22:08:33 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67900 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2003 22:08:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.zend.com) (192.117.235.230) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 2003 22:08:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 4162 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2003 22:08:25 -0000 Received: from guardian.zend.office (HELO andi-laptop.zend.com) (10.1.1.4) by int.zend.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 2003 22:08:25 -0000 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031023000405.06c3b708@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: andi@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:06:28 +0200 To: GPHemsley@aol.com,internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <5b.405c9ef5.2cc8590a@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] database driver: no more rows From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans) References: <5b.405c9ef5.2cc8590a@aol.com> At 06:04 PM 10/22/2003 -0400, GPHemsley@aol.com wrote: >Well, this would be my first time contributing to any discussion on this >list since I joined, but I have a question. > >It was suggested that this be implemented in PHP 5.0.0. Isn't PHP 5 so >much different than PHP 4 that scripts would have to be somewhat rewritten >for it anyway? (I'm not saying that PHP 5 is totally different, just >different enough.) > For PHP applications which are mostly functional there will be very little which will need to be fixed (if at all). Many OOP applications will also work and only some will need fixing. There will hopefully be a relative small amount of BC problems, and where BC was broken it was usually only when it was crucial. >I don't think I've had any experince with those functions returning FALSE >for me, but I think it's more logical that they differentiate between the >FALSE and the NULL for the reasons stated above. How is this dealt with today? Andi