Bug #15288 Updated: Image*-functions being avail even if they're not implemented by gd
| From: | matslin at orakel dot ntnu dot no | Date: | Sat, 02 Mar 2002 03:09:14 +0000 |
| Subject: | Bug #15288 Updated: Image*-functions being avail even if they're not implemented by gd | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.bugs |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-bugs+get-1447@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
ID: 15288
Updated by: matslin@orakel.ntnu.no
Reported By: matslin@orakel.ntnu.no
Status: Open
Bug Type: GD related
Operating System: All
PHP Version: 4.1.1
New Comment:
Did anything happen in this case? Did it just disappear into the magic
night? 4.1.2 still has the same old code in, a small CVS-change for the
TrueColor-functions .. but this (in my mind) broken approach is still
there.
Any reason why it wasnt included?
Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2002-02-02 18:36:19] matslin@orakel.ntnu.no
I've also created a patch that remove the functions from the
binary/module (if they're not available);
http://software.e-mats.org/patches/gd.c-diff-2002-02-02
(i also moved this to 'GD related'.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2002-01-30 10:41:52] matslin@orakel.ntnu.no
I've made a small patch based on the CVS-version that remove functions
that are not available. I'm not sure if i caught them all, but i made a
try :-) I've not removed the original error-messages ("gd was compiled
without support.."), so they're still in there (maybe a define or
./configure-option to select what way error-reporting should be done).
the diff:
http://software.e-mats.org/patches/gd.c-diff-2002-01-30
the source:
http://software.e-mats.org/patches/gd.c-cvs-2002-01-30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2002-01-30 08:51:11] derick@php.net
I'm +1 on your patch as well, can you make it against the latest CVS
version?
I'll make sure it gets committed then.
regards,
Derick
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2002-01-30 08:47:03] matslin@orakel.ntnu.no
This is excactly the point i'm trying to make. To me it seems like the
most logical thing would be to not implement the function at all, since
this would make function_exists() work as expected. Implementing the
function (to give an error message) - even though its not available
seems kinda useless, since this also makes it harder to make a general
solution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2002-01-30 08:13:23] mfischer@php.net
This one seems really a mess to me (declaring function which output
"not implemented") when we have 'function_exists()'.
Reopening for discussion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
http://bugs.php.net/15288
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=15288&edit=1