# ext/standard/tests/http/bug60570.phpt failure - Thread: https://externals.io/message/76706 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/76706 - Started by Dmitry Stogov on 2014-08-19T14:10:02+00:00 - Messages: 10 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #76706 — Dmitry Stogov — 2014-08-19T14:10:02+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76706 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. --- ## #76707 — Pierre Joye — 2014-08-19T16:36:46+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76707 · In reply to: #76706 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 --- ## #76712 — Laruence — 2014-08-20T02:48:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76712 · In reply to: #76706 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/ --- ## #76715 — Dmitry Stogov — 2014-08-20T05:24:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76715 · In reply to: #76712 Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC? Thanks. Dmitry. > Hey: > > > > > […] > but > > […] > I think it's okey to have a such function. > > we have get_defined_functions/constants/vars > > thanks > > […] > > > > -- > Laruence Xinchen Hui > http://www.laruence.com/ --- ## #76717 — Pierre Joye — 2014-08-20T07:37:41+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76717 · In reply to: #76715 > Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC? No, goahead :) -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org --- ## #76720 — Julien Pauli — 2014-08-20T09:12:45+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76720 · In reply to: #76715 > Anyone objects about it or thinks it needs RFC? > > Thanks. Dmitry. > > > > > > […] I would have then called it get_defined_resources() , for consistency. Julien.P --- ## #76727 — Dmitry Stogov — 2014-08-20T10:08:46+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76727 · In reply to: #76720 The are not defined. They are open (or closed but not freed yet). You probably meant get_defined_resorce_types() Thanks. Dmitry. > > > […] > wrote: > > […] > makes > > […] > function - > > […] > an > > […] > > I would have then called it get_defined_resources() , for consistency. > > Julien.P --- ## #76739 — Markus Fischer — 2014-08-20T18:51:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76739 · In reply to: #76727 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: > > https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab 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 --- ## #76744 — Stas Malyshev — 2014-08-20T20:50:55+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76744 · In reply to: #76706 Hi! > array of registered resources of particular type. See patch: > > https://gist.github.com/dstogov/f96c04f5979e726909ab 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/ --- ## #76746 — Dmitry Stogov — 2014-08-21T05:50:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76706#76746 · In reply to: #76744 done. Dmitry. On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > […] > > 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 don't think so, seems to be pretty non-controversial. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/