Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54887 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74772 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2011 18:02:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Aug 2011 18:02:18 -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 67.192.241.173 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.173 smtp173.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.173] ([67.192.241.173:50012] helo=smtp173.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 86/D2-58451-9AC355E4 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:02:18 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp7.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 6A1DE2582E8; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:02:14 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp7.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 0E1452582E1; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:02:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E553CA5.4050401@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:02:13 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "pierre.php@gmail.com" CC: "alan@akbkhome.com" , "internals@lists.php.net" References: <4e553b46.843cdf0a.0d43.4d1a@mx.google.com> In-Reply-To: <4e553b46.843cdf0a.0d43.4d1a@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.3.8 Released! From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! On 8/24/11 10:56 AM, pierre.php@gmail.com wrote: > What are you talking about? The change is exactly about that, change the > behavior when a string is passed. Code relying on passing string to is_a is buggy, since it is clearly documented as accepting object. That's what I am talking about. If your code relies on that, it has a bug, fix it. > We are back to the discussion about undeprecating is_a, from scratch... No we're not. It is not deprecated, nobody proposes to deprecate it - how we're back? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227