Re: cvs: php-src /main output.c /tests/output bug46900.phpt bug46903.phpt ob_014.phpt ob_015.phpt ob_start_basic_002.phpt ob_start_basic_004.phpt
| From: | Robin Fernandes | Date: | Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:10:04 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: cvs: php-src /main output.c /tests/output bug46900.phpt bug46903.phpt ob_014.phpt ob_015.phpt ob_start_basic_002.phpt ob_start_basic_004.phpt | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.cvs php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-43061@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
2009/2/15 Michael Wallner <mike@php.net>:
> Robin Fernandes wrote:
>>
>> robinf Sun Dec 28 19:50:58 2008 UTC
>>
>> Added files: /php-src/tests/output bug46903.phpt
>> bug46900.phpt
>> Modified files: /php-src/tests/output
>> ob_start_basic_004.phpt
>> ob_start_basic_002.phpt ob_015.phpt
>> ob_014.phpt /php-src/main output.c Log:
>> Fix bugs #46900 and #46903.
>>
>
>>
>>
>> http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/php-src/main/output.c?r1=1.214&r2=1.215&diff_format=u
>> Index: php-src/main/output.c
>> diff -u php-src/main/output.c:1.214 php-src/main/output.c:1.215
>> --- php-src/main/output.c:1.214 Mon Aug 18 07:45:59 2008
>> +++ php-src/main/output.c Sun Dec 28 19:50:58 2008
>> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
>>
>> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>> */
>> -/* $Id: output.c,v 1.214 2008/08/18 07:45:59 tony2001 Exp $ */
>> +/* $Id: output.c,v 1.215 2008/12/28 19:50:58 robinf Exp $ */
>> #ifndef PHP_OUTPUT_DEBUG
>> # define PHP_OUTPUT_DEBUG 0
>> @@ -1342,6 +1342,8 @@
>> }
>> if (chunk_size < 0) {
>> chunk_size = 0;
>> + } else if (chunk_size == 1) {
>> + chunk_size = 4096;
>> }
>>
>> if (SUCCESS != php_output_start_user(output_handler, chunk_size,
>> flags TSRMLS_CC)) {
>
> The documentation stated IMHO silly magic behavior of the old output layer.
> Why start sprinkling the new code with useless magic meanings?
Hi Mike,
Fair point regarding bug 46903. In this case, I can see how
documenting a change in behaviour could be better than implementing
the currently documented behaviour - either approach is fine by me.
I'm happy to revert this and raise a doc bug instead, if that's the
right way to go.
Cheers,
Robin