Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75975 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 97611 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2014 20:33:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Jul 2014 20:33:33 -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 108.166.43.75 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.75 smtp75.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.75] ([108.166.43.75:43494] helo=smtp75.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 95/91-23414-B1C10D35 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:33:32 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp18.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id CED1A3001AF; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:33:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp18.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 3F3273001E1; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:33:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Id: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com Received: from Stass-MacBook-Pro.local ([UNAVAILABLE]. [74.85.23.222]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA) by 0.0.0.0:465 (trex/5.2.10); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 20:33:31 GMT Message-ID: <53D01C19.9050606@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:33:29 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Stogov , Bob Weinand CC: Nikita Popov , Julien Pauli , PHP Internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Weird constant expression syntax and bug From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > It was a restriction to not support arrays in constant context. It seems > like nobody can remember why it was introduced. My vague recollection is that it had some troubles with keeping refcounts consistent, esp. withing bytecode caching context, but it may be a false memory :) > However, I think it's too dangerous to break it in last minute before > release. We definitely need to fix the WTF with "no runtime use" for defined constant and the segfault before the release. I think for the arrays, if we can't have it working properly we'd better not have array support there for 5.6.0 and fix it in 5.6.1 than have this weird "no runtime use" thing. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/