Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78603
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain basereality.com from 209.85.212.174 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1411031940310.13538@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1411031940310.13538@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 23:03:13 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+kxMuQG9LgzcdXXG80+8K37AEWvmMm0545OnqN5Y2Yv2YQL2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHPDBG scope
From: danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd)

Hi,

Derick wrote:
> I asked him what the original scope of phpdbg was,...
> And I very much agree that the above bullet points,

The original scope of a project and what it should be in the future
are not related always related. Please don't pretend that they're the
same thing.

Derick wrote:
> I've summarized his reply here:

Taking a private conversation and presenting it as what someone else
agrees to is also an underhand tactic.

From your emails to this list, you plainly wish to limit what PHPDBG
does. You may even have valid reasons for those wishes, but please
stop using underhand tactics to limit what other people are trying to
do.

cheers
Dan

On 3 November 2014 21:03, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is based on an email conversation between Joe Watkins and me. I
> asked him
> what the original scope of phpdbg was, and I've summarized his reply
> here:
>
> - PHPDBG was originally envisioned as a "gdb" for the Zend VM, with gdb
>   like commands to debug, and step through code.
> - Support for breaking on an opline, something that no userland PHP
>   users would need.
> - Support for breaking on lines, was an additional step later.
> - For PHP programmers, which spend most of their time at the console.
> - Not "intended to cover PHP's primary domain of HTTP requests".
>
> Then later, they "documented a way that you could use it to emulate an
> HTTP request, by setting those superglobals and executing your index.php
> - your code doesn't know the difference between a real request, and a
> cli-like script with the same super globals set."
>
> And Joe indicates, that with that addition, the "flood gates opened". He
> also said that he "would still like to remain in that narrow scope,
> phpdbg is still useful in it's current (pre xml stuff) form." and that
> it was never meant to "usurp xdebug", as "that is not where we were
> aiming, and it's an extremely unrealistic thing to even want."
>
> And I very much agree that the above bullet points, is what phpdbg's
> scope should be.
>
> Joe, if I got this wrong, then please say so :-)
>
> cheers,
> Derick
>
>
> --
> http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
> Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
> twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
> Posted with an email client that doesn't mangle email: alpine
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>