Yes, it would, given the root cause - but would you really want to
break
the whole of PHP for an academic exercise?It's not really an academic exercise. If we know there's a bug
someplace
we should at least look into it and try and understand it.Frank's referring to Zeev's three-years-ago decision to simply opt out
of
tsrm_shutdown() here... he's suggesting we revert it.Then if we decide to remove the trsm_shutdown call for a good reason
(circular dependency, blah blah blah) then we can do that and put a
nice
fat comment on why it's the right thing to do. But I do think it's
benefical to try and understand what's happening.Fine, but breaking working code while you're trying to understand what's
happening is far from beneficial to our users. Can't we at least #0 it?
There is no need to break code. The shutdown function was commented out
for a reason (crash) when that's fixed we can enable that code again.
- Frank
Fine, but breaking working code while you're trying to understand
what'shappening is far from beneficial to our users. Can't we at least #0
it?There is no need to break code. The shutdown function was commented
out
for a reason (crash) when that's fixed we can enable that code again.
I believe this entire part of this thread stems from a suggestion to
un-comment that on DEVELOPMENT MACHINES.
The OP did only implied the DEVELOPMENT MACHINE, however.
It was only a suggestion that debugging it in CGI would be easier than
in CLI, or at least more common for development users to hit it enough
to FIX it, instead of letting it fester.
It's possible the OP meant to CVS commit such a change, but I would
hope not...
--
Like Music?
http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm