Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch, but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that makes
wrong assumption.
Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new function -
get_resources() that returns an array of all registered resources or an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:
https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
Thanks. Dmitry.
hi,
Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch, but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that makes
wrong assumption.Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
It is mainly a debugging function, self contained, etc...
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
Hey:
Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch, but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that makes
wrong assumption.Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
I think it's okey to have a such function.
we have get_defined_functions/constants/vars
thanks
Thanks. Dmitry.
--
Laruence Xinchen Hui
http://www.laruence.com/
Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC?
Thanks. Dmitry.
Hey:
Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch,
but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that makes
wrong assumption.Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
I think it's okey to have a such function.we have get_defined_functions/constants/vars
thanks
Thanks. Dmitry.
--
Laruence Xinchen Hui
http://www.laruence.com/
Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC?
No, goahead :)
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC?
Thanks. Dmitry.
Hey:
Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch,
but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that makes
wrong assumption.Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
I think it's okey to have a such function.we have get_defined_functions/constants/vars
thanks
I would have then called it get_defined_resources() , for consistency.
Julien.P
The are not defined.
They are open (or closed but not freed yet).
You probably meant get_defined_resorce_types()
Thanks. Dmitry.
Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC?
Thanks. Dmitry.
Hey:
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Dmitry Stogov dmitry@zend.com
wrote:Hi,
Yesterday we discussed with Nikta the failure of
ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt. It was in context of AST patch,
but
the failure is not related to AST at all. It's just a bad test that
makes
wrong assumption.Resource leaks can't be caught using get_memory_usage().
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new
function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or
an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
Thoughts?
I think it's okey to have a such function.we have get_defined_functions/constants/vars
thanks
I would have then called it get_defined_resources() , for consistency.
Julien.P
Hello Dmitry,
To have a robust way to detect resource leaks I propose a new
function -
get_resources()that returns an array of all registered resources or
an
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:
my only concern would be the naming? Is there a policy for introducing
new global symbols in PHP? Looking at "get_resources" it doesn't look
far way from "get_header" or similar related stuff.
A quick search on github should only some very very few results so it's
probably statistically irrelevant. I was just wondering in general how
introducing global symbols without documented patterns (like __...
methods) works?
thank you,
- Markus
Hi!
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:
It would be better as a pull, it's be easier to comment on it.
For the function get_resources, the proto says it has no arguments, but
it actually has one S argument that is not documented. Could you add a
proto for it?
I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
I don't think so, seems to be pretty non-controversial.
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
done.
Dmitry.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Stas Malyshev smalyshev@sugarcrm.com
wrote:
Hi!
array of registered resources of particular type. See patch:
It would be better as a pull, it's be easier to comment on it.
For the function get_resources, the proto says it has no arguments, but
it actually has one S argument that is not documented. Could you add a
proto for it?I'm not sure if such small change needs RFC.
I don't think so, seems to be pretty non-controversial.
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/