Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55039 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 6777 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2011 11:41:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Aug 2011 11:41:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rrichards@cdatazone.org; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rrichards@cdatazone.org; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain cdatazone.org does not designate 207.58.142.213 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rrichards@cdatazone.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 207.58.142.213 smtp2go.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [207.58.142.213] ([207.58.142.213:44013] helo=smtp2go.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 21/B1-30996-3DD1E5E4 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:41:10 -0400 References: <4E5DACD6.1000002@sugarcrm.com> <4E5DE728.9090207@sugarcrm.com> <4E5E014E.3060105@liip.ch> In-Reply-To: <4E5E014E.3060105@liip.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8L1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <07A2D673-1F8E-4F6B-8AAB-DE9E2B61F382@cdatazone.org> Cc: Stas Malyshev , PHP Internals X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (8L1) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:40:51 -0400 To: Christian Stocker Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 5.4 beta & tests From: rrichards@cdatazone.org (Rob Richards) On Aug 31, 2011, at 5:39 AM, Christian Stocker w= rote: >=20 >=20 > On 31.08.11 09:47, Stas Malyshev wrote: >> Hi! >>=20 >> For simplexml test (ext/simplexml/tests/bug48601.phpt), it looks like >> Ilia reverted the fix for bug #48601 with this: >>=20 >> http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_4/ext/simplexml/simp= lexml.c?r1=3D311870&r2=3D311874 >>=20 >>=20 >> I'm not sure what simplexml is supposed to return in each case, the >> tests seem to be contradictory. Anybody knows what is the right thing to >> do here? >=20 > Ilia fixed test 0008.phpt with that, but for some reason an XPath of > "***" isn't considered invalid by libxml (but "**" is, don't ask me why > ;)). I'd say if libxml doesn't think the XPath expression is invalid, we > should return an empty array and not false. With DOM exactly that happens.= >=20 > I therefore vote for reverting Ilia's patch mentioned above. >=20 > chregu I'd like to revert it as well. Have been going back an forth myself. It look= like sometimes internally libxml does see the expressions as invalid but do= esn't communicate that back to the caller (bug there IMO) so right now you c= an always write a test that fails regardless of which code is used in simple= xml Rob=