Re: cvs: php4 /ext/sablot php_sablot.h

> Again, making a bad situation worse is not a good thing. I never said that > my code's perfect, and indeed there are some places where there's still > direct reference to auto-defined variable names, which is not a good > thing. Instead of making the situation worse though, when I face something > like this, I tend to try and improve it. What exactly have you improved? I agree that the macro duplication is bad. But having everything, including visible auto-defined variables be ZNED_ or zend_ doesn't make any sense to me. An extension now looks like this: ::php_foo.h:: extern zend_module_entry foo_module_entry; /* ZEND_FOO_API here? */ #ifdef PHP_WIN32 #define PHP_FOO_API __declspec(dllexport) #else #define PHP_FOO_API #endif #ifdef ZTS #include "TSRM.h" #endif ZEND_MINIT_FUNCTION(foo); ZEND_MSHUTDOWN_FUNCTION(foo); ZEND_RINIT_FUNCTION(foo); ZEND_RSHUTDOWN_FUNCTION(foo); ZEND_MINFO_FUNCTION(foo); ZEND_FUNCTION(my_func); ZEND_FUNCTION(your_func); ZEND_BEGIN_MODULE_GLOBALS(foo) int bar; ZEND_END_MODULE_GLOBALS(foo) #ifdef ZTS #define FOOG(v) TSRMG(foo_globals_id, zend_xmms_globals *, v) #else #define FOOG(v) (foo_globals.v) #endif ::foo.c:: ZEND_DECLARE_MODULE_GLOBALS(foo) function_entry foo_functions[] = { ZEND_FE(my_func, NULL) ZEND_FE(your_func, NULL) } zend_module_entry foo_module_entry = { "foo", foo_functions, ZEND_MINIT(foo), ZEMD_MSHUTDOWN(foo), ZEND_RINIT(foo), ZEND_RSHUTDOWN(foo), ZEND_MINFO(foo), STANDARD_MODULE_PROPERTIES }; #ifdef COMPILE_DL_FOO ZEND_GET_MODULE(foo) #endif static void php_foo_init_globals(zend_foo_globals *foo_globals) { foo_globals->bar = 0; } ZEND_INI_BEGIN() STD_ZEND_INI_ENTRY("foo.bar", "0", ZEND_INI_ALL, OnUpdateInt, bar, zend_foo_globals, foo_globals) ZEND_INI_END() PHP_MINIT_FUNCTION(foo) { ZEND_INIT_MODULE_GLOBALS(foo, php_foo_init_globals, NULL); REGISTER_INI_ENTRIES(); return SUCCESS; } ZEND_MSHUTDOWN_FUNCTION(foo) { UNREGISTER_INI_ENTRIES(); return SUCCESS; } ZEND_MINFO_FUNCTION(foo) { php_info_print_table_start(); php_info_print_table_header(2, "foo support", "enabled"); php_info_print_table_end(); DISPLAY_INI_ENTRIES(); } ZEND_FUNCTION(my_func) { zval **foo_arg; int argc = ZEND_NUM_ARGS(); int foo; if (argc > 1 || (argc && zend_get_parameters_ex(argc, &foo_arg) == FAILURE)) { ZEND_WRONG_PARAM_COUNT(); } convert_to_long_ex(foo_arg); foo = Z_LVAL_PP(foo_arg); REUTRN_LONG(foo); } Is this really what the goal is here? It seems like a contest to see how many times "Zend" can appear in the code. I think some of this stuff should be PHP_ or for things that really are engine related, perhaps ENGINE_ to at least pretend that this is a modular architecture where if someone was brave enough they could try to use the modularity and plug in another engine. However, if everyone on php-dev thinks the above look to a PHP extension is just fine, I'll stop bickering. -Rasmus