Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64915 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28407 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2013 00:02:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 13 Jan 2013 00:02:38 -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 67.192.241.155 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.155 smtp155.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.155] ([67.192.241.155:59576] helo=smtp155.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FE/E0-24212-D99F1F05 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 19:02:38 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp32.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 9B7A050108; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 19:02:35 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp32.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 54F99500C4; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 19:02:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50F1F99A.5010906@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 16:02:34 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Ramsey CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: <06.87.24230.C3291F05@pb1.pair.com> In-Reply-To: <06.87.24230.C3291F05@pb1.pair.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > I can submit a new pull request against the master branch, if that's > acceptable. This is intended for 5.5. The patch should be against 5.5, I think. 5.5 is in alpha, so adding an isolated function to it is no problem (we're still considering adding a major language feature to it, so function is definitely less invasive). 5.4 backport is possible - I'll look into it and if there's no potential for problem we can have it. 5.3 is not an option on this stage, I think. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227