Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56873
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE4853995589C@MBX202.domain.local>
References: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485399554D7@MBX202.domain.local>
	<7070130643313812382@unknownmsgid>
	<9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE4853995589C@MBX202.domain.local>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 01:36:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU5P60Xip0GbUD=YPoiUiV5sOYU2qeMfoUF=QhcokpBK5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Clint M Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

Hi Clint,

Thanks for the updated patch :)

Some suggestions (did not test it yet only review it),

- add test cases for non public property (private, protected)
- show examples of the concept of readonly property (as it is allowed
in the C# equivalent

I would also suggest to either take over the RFC (contact the original
author) or create your own to update it with a full list of examples,
documentation, and all necessary information. This is a complex task
with many possible (edge) cases. An updated RFC is a must to be able
to discuss such additions.

Cheers,

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Clint M Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote=
:
> https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug_id=3D49526&patch=3Dv2.1&revisi=
on=3Dlatest
>
> Alright, nevermind on the failing tests, figured that out. =A0I didn't re=
alize the test structure doesn't =A0indicate that it was segfaulting, that =
fixed all of the failing tests.
>
> So... I guess this patch is up for discussion?
>
> I don't presently have any static getters implemented, as best I can tell=
 it would require some changes to opcodes, I didn't dive into anything besi=
des exploration there.
>
> -Clint
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Fitch [mailto:will.fitch@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 1:41 PM
> To: Clint M Priest
> Cc: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch
>
> Much better implementation.
>
> As for the failed tests, I would double check and make sure you don't hav=
e any stray debug statements (e.g. printf).
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 11, 2011, at 2:27 PM, Clint M Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote:
>
>> https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug_id=3D49526&patch=3Daccessor_v=
2.
>> diff&revision=3Dlatest
>>
>> I rewrote part of how it handles the job due to abysmal performance of v=
ersion 1. =A0This one is near the same performance as without the code chan=
ges using __get() and is actually faster in some cases (public getter).
>>
>> I also checked all the tests and fixed the issues I found related.
>>
>> There is however some strange behavior that I do not understand. =A0For =
some reason if I run all of the tests, 100+ or so will fail. =A0If I have t=
he test script write those failed tests to a file and just run those tests,=
 all but four work fine. =A0It appears to be something to do with line endi=
ngs, in other cases the output does not match expected because of the addit=
ion of 'unicode' to the output. =A0I've no idea what's going on here but af=
ter 3 days of mucking around, I can't find a solution as to why this is occ=
urring.
>>
>> These failures do not occur on a fresh checkout but nothing I've changed=
 should be causing any of the issues, just no idea here, any help would be =
appreciated.
>>
>> Felipe: I could not find any segmentation fault tests from before when y=
ou posted, nor now. =A0Are you still seeing segmentation faults?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> -Clint
>>



--=20
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org