Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:57110 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25610 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2011 10:37:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Dec 2011 10:37:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Linux 2.6 Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:53353] helo=xdebug.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 09/60-22359-4FF99FE4 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 05:37:41 -0500 Received: from localhost (xdebug.org [127.0.0.1]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDBFCDE13D; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:37:37 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:37:37 +0000 (GMT) X-X-Sender: derick@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl To: Patrick ALLAERT cc: Pierre Joye , Ilia Alshanetsky , =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9_R=C3=B8mcke?= , David Soria Parra , Stas Malyshev , PHP Developers Mailing List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] REQUEST_TIME change in PHP 5.4 From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) On Mon, 26 Dec 2011, Patrick ALLAERT wrote: > 2011/12/24 Pierre Joye : > > > > Right but there is a clear BC break here. And yes I really don't like > > how datetime deals with that but it is how it is, and it is certainly > > the only case where it fails (or almost). > > > > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > >> Introducing additional server > >> variables just makes things inconsistent, especially this late in the > >> release cycle. > > On one side there's a clear BC break which, according to the related > RFC, is to be considered as a blocker, An RFC? Which one? > on the other one, a strong and > valid argument regarding spreading additional server variables. > I'm not sure being late in the release process is truely a valid > argument for accepting a BC break. > Can't we make some compromise here like making all date/time > classes/functions work uniformly with ints and floats? It's parsing a *string*, not an int or float. Changing anything with how the parser works is definitely going to be a clear BC break. Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug