Re: Re: RFC for new INI's
| From: | Richard Quadling | Date: | Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:54:47 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: RFC for new INI's | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-42985@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
2009/2/10 Richard Quadling <rquadling@googlemail.com>:
> 2009/2/10 Karsten Dambekalns <karsten@typo3.org>:
>> Hi Eric.
>>
>> On 10.02.2009 3:27 Uhr, Eric Stewart wrote:
>>>
>>> A new RFC for PHP's proposed INI files have been added to the wiki. Below
>>> is
>>> a direct link to the page.
>>> http://wiki.php.net/rfc/newinis
>>
>> I love the settings for production, but I think you reversed the meaning of
>> allow_call_time_pass_reference - if it is allowed no warning will be issued.
>> So, to make your intention of
>>
>> ----
>> ; Default Value: On (Issue warnings)
>> ; Development Value: On (Issue warnings)
>> ; Production Value: Off (Suppress warnings)
>> ----
>>
>> work, you need to write that the other way around - 'Off' means 'issue
>> warnings'... It is:
>> Development Value: Off (Issue warnings)
>> Production Value: On (Suppress warnings)
>>
>>
>> In production session.bug_compat_42 is off, but according to the "summary"
>> you want it to be on for development (so that warnings about it are shown, I
>> assume). In the development php.ini the actual values for both settings are
>> off, though.
>>
>>
>> And I am not sure about register_argc_argv having different values in both
>> files. I understand ot being off in production for speed reasons, but if it
>> "just works" in development and "suddenly stops working" in
>> production...
>> But that's a minor issues.
>>
>> All in all like the proposed settings!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Karsten
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>
> Regarding ...
> "; Section headers (e.g. [Foo]) are also silently ignored, even though
> ; they might mean something in the future."
>
> This is no longer true. See
> http://docs.php.net/manual/en/ini.sections.php
>
> I would suggest changing this to ...
>
> "; Section headers (e.g. [Foo]) are also silently ignored, even though
> ; they might mean something in the future. The exception to this rule is
> ; section headers starting with [HOST= and [PATH=
> ; See : http://www.php.net/manual/en/ini.sections.php"
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Quadling.
> --
> -----
> Richard Quadling
> Zend Certified Engineer :
> http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
> "Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
>
Better grammar.
"; Section headers (e.g. [Foo]) are also silently ignored, even though
; they might mean something in the future. The exceptions to this rule are
; section headers starting with [HOST= or [PATH=
; See : http://www.php.net/manual/en/ini.sections.php"
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"