Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:59705 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 66462 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2012 05:12:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 11 Apr 2012 05:12:17 -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 67.192.241.193 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.193 smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.193] ([67.192.241.193:41085] helo=smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id ED/CF-18401-0B2158F4 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:12:17 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id BAE1A3C893C; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:12:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 5C8F93C89EC; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:12:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4F8512AC.4030208@sugarcrm.com> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:12:12 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Craig CC: Nikita Popov , PHP internals References: <4F84C76A.9090104@sugarcrm.com> <4F84D482.20905@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow non-variable arguments to empty() From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > Well, technically it's discussion /and/ vote. I know we've been wanting > to get out of the habit of "push first, ask later," which is precisely > what RFC helps us avoid. Personally, I think any commits for a Nobody's pushing anything. We're talking about implementing it in a fork, it's completely different thing. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227