Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79505 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 99408 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2014 15:41:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Dec 2014 15:41:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=anatol.php@belski.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=anatol.php@belski.net; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain belski.net from 85.214.73.107 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: anatol.php@belski.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 85.214.73.107 klapt.com Received: from [85.214.73.107] ([85.214.73.107:34211] helo=h1123647.serverkompetenz.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 4D/F1-23416-B1817845 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:41:16 -0500 Received: by h1123647.serverkompetenz.net (Postfix, from userid 33) id 0A22623D6007; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 16:41:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from 217.253.42.37 (SquirrelMail authenticated user anatol@belski.net) by webmail.klapt.com with HTTP; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 16:41:12 +0100 Message-ID: <24dd454461613862020d74fd2bdb3c54.squirrel@webmail.klapt.com> In-Reply-To: <5485FF34.1050305@gmail.com> References: <790a8d7299a7cda01ee76d8293b7d5af.squirrel@webmail.klapt.com> <5485FF34.1050305@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 16:41:12 +0100 To: =?UTF-8?Q?=22=C3=81ngel_Gonz=C3=A1lez=22?= Cc: internals@lists.php.net User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.2 [SVN] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Native TLS From: anatol.php@belski.net ("Anatol Belski") Hi, On Mon, December 8, 2014 20:42, Ángel González wrote: > On 03/12/14 10:22, Anatol Belski wrote: > >> I meant that as well, to the time it's merged all the TSRMLS_* thingies >> should be removed. I kept them only while developed and now for the >> RFC so >> the diff shows the only change done, otherwise it would sink in the >> unrelevant stuff. >> >> Therefore I'd rather stay by the yes/no choice as removing TSRMLS_* is >> the essential part of the RFC - so better at once then :) As otherwise >> one can sure find some factor to defer the actual change, but the change >> is the actual goal. >> >> Regards >> >> >> Anatol >> > > It seems quite clear to me: > 1. Change the code. > 2. Remove the TSRMLS_* macros from the code in a subsequent commit > 3. Leave the no-op macros at an unused header for a few releases, for > the benefit of porting extensions / extensions targetting several > versions. > 1. and 2. - yes, to 3. - won't help much probably as the core function signatures will be changed. And the compatibility macros are probably not doable as most of the functions keep their names. Sometimes it could help, but for a PECL ext - as the core function calls have to be corrected, so the extension own ones can be done as well. Regards Anatol