Hi
I have some updates that I'd like to make to
ext/tests/standard/array/range.phpt, the updates work fine with
unicode.semantics=off but not with unicode.semantics=on. The problem
seems to be that the warning Notices that are generated are different
with unicode on. This doesn't look like intentional behaviour but I'm
guessing it might well be something that isn't implemented yet.
So, my question is - is it reasonable/helpful to add a test in CVS that
I know will fail if it's in an area that is currently under development?
Zoe Slattery
IBM UK
I have some updates that I'd like to make to
ext/tests/standard/array/range.phpt, the updates work fine with
unicode.semantics=off but not with unicode.semantics=on. The problem seems to
be that the warning Notices that are generated are different with unicode on.
This doesn't look like intentional behaviour but I'm guessing it might well be
something that isn't implemented yet.So, my question is - is it reasonable/helpful to add a test in CVS that I know
will fail if it's in an area that is currently under development?
I would say that it's a good idea to commit those if you are certain
that the "unicode" behavior is wrong. In other cases I suggest to write
a mail to internals about it.
regards,
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org
Derick Rethans wrote:
I have some updates that I'd like to make to
ext/tests/standard/array/range.phpt, the updates work fine with
unicode.semantics=off but not with unicode.semantics=on. The problem seems to
be that the warning Notices that are generated are different with unicode on.
This doesn't look like intentional behaviour but I'm guessing it might well be
something that isn't implemented yet.So, my question is - is it reasonable/helpful to add a test in CVS that I know
will fail if it's in an area that is currently under development?I would say that it's a good idea to commit those if you are certain
that the "unicode" behavior is wrong. In other cases I suggest to write
a mail to internals about it.
I've looked at this a bit more and have absolutely no idea whether the
behaviour that I get is expected or not, it is certainly different. So,
here is a very cutdown test case that shows the difference. Note that
it's not intended to do anything sensible - I've just pulled it out of a
larger test caes that executes range() with all sorts of input.
This passes fine on PHP6 with unicode.semantics=off.
--TEST--
PHP6 unicode Notices different
--FILE--
<?php
$low_arr = "ABCD";
$high_arr = array(1,2);
echo "\n-- creating an array with low = '$low_arr' and high =
'$high_arr' --\n";
var_dump( range( $low_arr, $high_arr ) );
--EXPECTF--
-- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in %s on line %d
array(1) {
[0]=>
string(1) "A"
}
--UEXPECTF--
-- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in %s on line %d
array(1) {
[0]=>
unicode(1) "A"
}
Here is the actual output on PHP6
Notice: Array to string conversion in /home/zoe/TESTS/range/ztest.php on
line 5
-- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in /home/zoe/TESTS/range/ztest.php on
line 6
array(1) {
[0]=>
unicode(1) "A"
}
So. with unicode.semantics=on an additional Notice is generated which
appears to be caused by the echo statment. Any ideas?
regards,
Derick
So. with unicode.semantics=on an additional Notice is generated which
appears to be caused by the echo statment. Any ideas?
Yes, I'll look into it a bit later.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
Fixed, thanks for the heads up.
--TEST--
PHP6 unicode Notices different
--FILE--
<?php
$low_arr = "ABCD";
$high_arr = array(1,2);echo "\n-- creating an array with low = '$low_arr' and high =
'$high_arr' --\n";
var_dump( range( $low_arr, $high_arr ) );--EXPECTF--
-- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in %s on line %d
array(1) {
[0]=>
string(1) "A"
}
--UEXPECTF---- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in %s on line %d
array(1) {
[0]=>
unicode(1) "A"
}Here is the actual output on PHP6
Notice: Array to string conversion in /home/zoe/TESTS/range/ztest.php on
line 5-- creating an array with low = 'ABCD' and high = 'Array' --
Notice: Array to string conversion in /home/zoe/TESTS/range/ztest.php on
line 6
array(1) {
[0]=>
unicode(1) "A"
}So. with unicode.semantics=on an additional Notice is generated which
appears to be caused by the echo statment. Any ideas?
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
Hello Zoe,
I did the same with a certain case in SPL. The result was that any
test run of 5.2.1 had failures on that test while as HEAD did not have
it anymore. The thing is that I used it to remind myself that i have
to merge the fix and to anybody else that this is not working correct
yet. In this case however you need to keep track of changes in the area
because sometimes the actual fix chnages the resulting output a bit from
the original expectation. So you should stay in touch with the actual
developer, of course at least informing him of the error.
best regards
marcus
Tuesday, May 15, 2007, 5:42:40 PM, you wrote:
Hi
I have some updates that I'd like to make to
ext/tests/standard/array/range.phpt, the updates work fine with
unicode.semantics=off but not with unicode.semantics=on. The problem
seems to be that the warning Notices that are generated are different
with unicode on. This doesn't look like intentional behaviour but I'm
guessing it might well be something that isn't implemented yet.
So, my question is - is it reasonable/helpful to add a test in CVS that
I know will fail if it's in an area that is currently under development?
Zoe Slattery
IBM UK
Best regards,
Marcus
Hi
I have some updates that I'd like to make to
ext/tests/standard/array/range.phpt, the updates work fine with
unicode.semantics=off but not with unicode.semantics=on. The problem
seems to be that the warning Notices that are generated are different
with unicode on. This doesn't look like intentional behaviour but I'm
guessing it might well be something that isn't implemented yet.So, my question is - is it reasonable/helpful to add a test in CVS that
I know will fail if it's in an area that is currently under development?
Definitely yes.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal