Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56874 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28361 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2011 00:42:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Dec 2011 00:42:34 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cpriest@zerocue.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cpriest@zerocue.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 74.115.204.54 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cpriest@zerocue.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.115.204.54 relay-hub202.domainlocalhost.com Received: from [74.115.204.54] ([74.115.204.54:35317] helo=relay-hub202.domainlocalhost.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DA/65-21075-9FD45EE4 for ; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:42:34 -0500 Received: from MBX202.domain.local ([169.254.2.249]) by HUB202.domain.local ([74.115.204.52]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:42:30 -0500 To: Pierre Joye CC: "internals@lists.php.net" Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch Thread-Index: Acy4OjadBvFZYH6iTIC+0CF/aviwQwALIDKAAADGOsAACYqOgAAKTuDw Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:42:30 +0000 Message-ID: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE48539955910@MBX202.domain.local> References: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485399554D7@MBX202.domain.local> <7070130643313812382@unknownmsgid> <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE4853995589C@MBX202.domain.local> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.64.23] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint M Priest) There are already two tests against private read and private write, should = I add two for protected as well? -----Original Message----- From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre.php@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 6:36 PM To: Clint M Priest Cc: internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch 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 th= e 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, docum= entation, and all necessary information. This is a complex task with many p= ossible (edge) cases. An updated RFC is a must to be able to discuss such a= dditions. Cheers, On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Clint M Priest wrote= : > https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug_id=3D49526&patch=3Dv2.1&revisi= o > n=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 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 >> -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org