Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:53710 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 8246 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2011 21:34:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Jun 2011 21:34:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=michael@no-surprises.co.uk; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=michael@no-surprises.co.uk; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain no-surprises.co.uk designates 80.68.93.37 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: michael@no-surprises.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.68.93.37 river.mgdm.net Received: from [80.68.93.37] ([80.68.93.37:41290] helo=river.mgdm.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DB/70-04352-0EBEC0E4 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:34:25 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.65] (87-194-154-8.bethere.co.uk [87.194.154.8]) (Authenticated sender: michael) by river.mgdm.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCFC1168411; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 22:34:21 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4E0CEBDC.6050206@no-surprises.co.uk> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 22:34:20 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110516 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stas Malyshev CC: PHP internals References: <4E0CE015.80503@no-surprises.co.uk> <4E0CEAC5.3070800@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: <4E0CEAC5.3070800@sugarcrm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Improvements to HTTP stream metadata From: michael@no-surprises.co.uk (Michael Maclean) On 30/06/11 22:29, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > On 6/30/11 1:44 PM, Michael Maclean wrote: >> * move the current contents of the wrapper_data array to a key called >> 'headers' within wrapper_data; > > This means breaking every script in existence that uses this data now. > Probably not a good idea. Maybe we should think about a BC way to do the > same. Yeah; I'm open to suggestions on that front. I couldn't really think of another way to do it. The same data also ends up in the bizarre $http_response_headers var that gets spontaneously created in local scope - I've wondered about how good that is to do. -- Cheers, Michael