Re: cleaning up the functions - any volunteers?

2008/6/28 Jordan Wambaugh <jordan@wambaugh.org>: > > On Jun 28, 2008, at 7:27 AM, David Coallier wrote: > >> The idea of the new parsing parameter is to catch the number of >> parameters as well. For instance when you have >> >> if (ZEND_NUM_ARGS() < 2) { >> WRONG_PARAM_COUNT; >> } >> >> then your zend parse param function call should have 2 params or more >> Ex: >> >> int argc; >> char *name; >> zval **other; >> >> if (zend_parse_parameters(ZEND_NUM_ARGS() TSRMLS_CC, "sZ", &name, >> &other, &argc) == FAILURE) { >> return; >> } >> >> This way of parsing the parameters remove the ZEND_NUM_ARGS() and >> WRONG_PARAM_COUNT and adds consistency in the return error messages >> across the language. >> >> Also next time please read the previous entries of the thread : >> >> See: http://url.ie/hck that was about the 3rd or 4th >> message. >> >> Anyways that's ok, I lot of conflicts now in formatted_print.c and >> assert.c but I'll work around them to get the resolved. We just have >> to get organized on which files we'll be working on then. Right now, >> Olivier is working on file.c and has done string.c so please don't do >> those 2 files. > > Ok, sorry, I didn't catch the thread where you said you were going to work > on standard. Do you want me to fix it so I'm not checking ZEND_NUM_ARGS, or > should I just leave that to you? Go ahead, you are pretty well started, I'll adjust after you are done :) -- Slan, David