Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76136
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH42Potz-cxKPwVwupJMW2UstTS-d6AWAF5J5Y0zRES3gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+9eiLvLhAWCfRmJ05nm46KdDymFmA=g-mkc0uuJeXbVppXnPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU436-SMTP143809EBE997F38F5F7EF18E2FE0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+9eiLsWkWxDFSmrqru8ue9A6fZasEqy_xfmjCanvx+mkLXfMA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU436-SMTP167808268E21EDECAB34E34E2FE0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+9eiLs+R3NDgkrdhso=yJdFWbyxnVA6DptxPZyQs2Vu8=GBTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53D01C19.9050606@sugarcrm.com>
	<BLU436-SMTP267FD9162E561B89DF6ECE2FE0@phx.gbl>
	<CAH-PCH42Potz-cxKPwVwupJMW2UstTS-d6AWAF5J5Y0zRES3gw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 21:22:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH4h3dGRGv_CGt3-9f0yw9VUiExGuWyH5LX6VfrHGAdLpg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, 
	Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113b4ecc158db804ff097f2f
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Weird constant expression syntax and bug
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--001a113b4ecc158db804ff097f2f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com> wrote=
:
>
>> Am 23.7.2014 um 22:33 schrieb Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>:
>> > 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 ma=
y
>> > be a false memory :)
>>
>> That doesn't really make much sense to me, at least not with current
>> engine...
>> As said, I've tested it and didn't find issues. Maybe I just test the
>> wrong things=E2=80=A6
>>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> Well, we still could fix it now, AFAIK, we will still have another RC no=
w
>> and when we fix it only for 5.6.1, there also will only be one RC in
>> between.
>> That's no gain in testing time etc..
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> > --
>> > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
>> > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
> yeah, there will be another RC for sure, but we have to have some
> resulotion for that.
> I think it would be safer to remove stuff (even if just the array support=
)
> than trying to fix in in a hurry, as it would probably just cause shippin=
g
> the final with some other bug(s) or having a couple of other RCs.
>

nevermind, I've somehow missed
https://github.com/php/php-src/commit/c49a06168ed3759779452e2b2a44da22e75a0=
702
and
https://github.com/php/php-src/commit/d909b6330e314bb434350317fda5bec185ea1=
2c0


--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--001a113b4ecc158db804ff097f2f--