Re: Re: [vote] pow-operator
| From: | Christopher Jones | Date: | Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:14:18 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [vote] pow-operator | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-70758@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 12/19/2013 11:09 AM, Tjerk Meesters wrote:
Hi Sean, On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Sean Coates <sean@seancoates.com> wrote:Can you make the RFC clearer? (In general, RFCs are not good at accepting feedback from mail list discussions.) Chris -- christopher.jones@oracle.com http://twitter.com/ghrd Free PHP & Oracle book: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/php/underground-php-oracle-manual-098250.htmlSorry I'm late (possibly too late?) to this, but: 1) ifIt's implied in this section: No changes to existing code, safe for one: var_dump(pow([], 2)); // int(0) instead of float(0) Perhaps it could be made more obvious, but yes, the original function remains there to serve exactly the purpose of callbacks; its innards have been replaced by calling the PHP_SAPI pow_function(), though.pow()is turning from a function into a construct, can it still be used for callbacks? I don't see a mention of that part in the RFC.