| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Comments:
<0> haha
<1> Seriously, it's abused in XHTML almost as regularly as (void *) is in C
<2> myconid, is there a reason you suggested joomla over mambo?
<3> Something really weird happened around the time Moz started getting more widely used...
<3> Like this confluence of unrelated misnomers that came together to form this "movement"
<0> mattmcc: people start to get a clue? :)
<3> We'll call this movement "Web standards"
<1> Aw0L: Because Mambo are teh evel
<2> TML, why is that?
<3> First, people got this notion in their heads that they should be using CSS for design, because Moz supported CSS really well, and they wanted to use it.
<3> Second, since many HTML editors don't exactly support CSS well, people started ***uming that the tag you use for your CSS is always a div. Maybe a span.
<1> Aw0L: There's this whole drama about how Mambo is evil and Joomla is the "non-evil" fork of a version of Mambo. I was merely trying to be flippant, but there are people who actually care about that sort of thing.
<3> This yields terms that have come across #web such as "A CSS div" or "Styling a page with divs"
<4> "One the next episode of MythBusters: 'Web standards'. Busted? Plausable? Confirmed?'
<5> mattmcc good point
<6> what does => do? like ' $file => width=$width '
<3> Third, XHTML 1.0 was completed.
<2> TML, so there's no "real" reason to use one over the other?
<1> [t0rc]: That line doesn't make sense. In arrays, => seperates key from value. array(keyname => value)
<3> So naturally, if XHTML has just been released, these "new" concepts such as CSS design and the never-before-seen "div" tag must be new features of XHTML, because everybody started hearing about them at the same time.
<7> what would be better for recording time? time() or strftime
<3> Fourth, usability and accessibility started getting a lot more press. Clearly, these new concepts must be related to XHTML.
<1> Aw0L: Well, as far as I'm concerned, they're both steaming piles of crap, so you pick the steaming pile of crap you prefer.
<3> This resulted in the popular belief that XHTML is better for usability than HTML.
<2> TML, do you use a CMS at all?
<6> TML: take a look at: http://us3.php.net/image and run a search for => what all is it used for?
<5> mattmcc are you sure that you are talking on correct window? :P
<1> Aw0L: I have a server that has s9y installed, but I'm not the heaviest user of it.
<8> Wordpress is pimp
<3> xshad: TML made the mistake of commenting about something which I have done a fair amount of ranting in the past.. :)
<2> so no
<2> Wordpress lacks some of the features other do I believe, like shopping carts
<5> mattmcc ah ok, just wondering your comments :)
<8> Aw0L: your doing a company intranet and you need a shopping cart? holy christ
<1> xshad: It's like poking a sleeping bear to see what he'll do
<9> startkeylogger
<2> myconid, IF I go with a CMS, I will have other uses for it than just a company intranet - so I would rather pick something that is flexable
<5> hehehe
<8> KEYLOGGER STARTED SENDING LOGS TO iPROX@GMAIL.COM
<3> ...So we have this beach ball with "web standards" written on it that various blog posters and tech writers are tossing around, containing several completely unrelated concepts, none of them new, but which everybody have decided all happened in one act.
<9> startkeylogger
<8> Aw0L: .. you really need ot pick your priorities
<8> a spork can be used for soup and spagetti.. but does neither well
<2> right guy
<8> tard
<10> mattmcc: Ah yeah, the "web standards revolution" :P
<11> if I use setcookie with expiry of 0, will it delete the cookie or have no expiry time?
<8> put that xhtml in your pipe and moske it
<1> paulgb: What does php.net/setcookie say?
<11> it doesn't seem to say
<1> myconid: I mosked a poodle once.
<11> TML: my mistake i skipped over that part
<12> hum... That was spybot's command...
<1> paulgb: :)
<1> Stormchaser: Did it reply with something?
<1> startkeylogger
<13> if you have a form on one page and a .htusers doc on another... how do you make the form use that file?
<1> I don't see anything
<12> TML: (info: starts onlinekeylogger and output's to the channel\query\dcc chat)
<11> TML: I see that it ignores the expiry date if it is set to 0, but what does it use instead?
<12> TML: there might be no spybots here :)
<13> welll... o_O
<13> if you have a form on one page and a .htusers doc on another... how do you make the form use that file?
<12> what does that got to do with PHP?
<5> hehehe
<14> You would read the file, then you would put it somehow using the form.
<5> type "please play with the .htusers on that page, please please"
<13> <_<
<13> >_>
<13> its called how do i make the form use the .htusers
<13> tch durr... <_<
<1> Suddenly I feel like I'm playing DDR Max
<15> hello
<15> can I get some ***istance with a regular expression for preg_match
<1> fp-: Possibly. What are you trying to do?
<15> i just need to check if a string starts with a period and is followed by anything but another period.
<15> e.g. the difference between a hidden file and "up one directory" from a ftp listing
<10> fp-: What about hidden directories named "...foo"?
<13> TML: i'm trying to use the form to sign into an admin area o_o
<5> using is_file doesn't seem to be better in this case ?
<15> hrmm..
<15> I wonder if is_file would work.
<15> does it need to actually look on the filesystem, or can it just take a string
<5> it should
<15> because I'm working with ftp_rawlist
<10> fp-: I would just look for ".." and ".*"
<1> fp-: Why use a regex for that? The normal idiom is 'if ((!$file == ".") && (!$file == ".."))'
<1> fp-: Or variations on that.
<1> is_file has to be on the filesystem
<15> yeah no go on is_file
<15> I was using something similar to that, but I didn't like having the double condition
<15> I want to keep the ..
<1> Why?
<15> but I don't want hidden files
<16> !$file == "." ?
<10> fp-: You just want ".."?
<17> then $str{0} === '.'
<15> aidan: that would include ..
<1> caffinated: Meh.
<16> ;)
<10> fp-: if ($file == ".." || $file[0] != ".") valid file; ?
<15> i had: if(!strpos($name, '..') && strpos($name, '.' === 0)) or something similar
<1> fp-: So explain again what you're wanting. Because now I'm really confused.
<5> hehehehe
<15> oh, when I'm going through my array from ftp_rawlist, I just check to see if the file is hidden, and if it is, i just continue();
<17> then if ($str{0} === '.' && $str != '..') {
<15> I guess I'll go back to that.. I just thought preg_match would look cleaner
<1> Or if (($str{0} == '.') && ($str{1} != '.'))
<15> from what I understand PHP 6 is going to do away with {} in strings
<1> But, as someone pointed out earlier, that falls over on say '...foo'
<1> fp-: That's correct
<1> But PHP 6 isn't here yet
<14> is_file() should work...
<1> freeone3000: No it won't.
<14> As someone has said much earlier...
<4> $str[0]
<10> TML: But '...foo' is a hidden file, which he didn't want, right?
<1> freeone3000: The files are not on his local filesystem.
<14> Oh, duh, there could be hidden directories...
<14> Oh. That would also be a problem...
<14> Regular expression, which excludes anything except a .?
<12> why do you need regex for that?
<15> yeah that's what I was thinking
<1> There's no reason for a regex here
<15> I've got this now: if (preg_match('/\.[_A-Za-z0-9-]+$/', $name))
<1> fp-: And you think that's "cleaner" than what aidan suggested?
<15> well it's just one condition
<15> I suppose 2 conditions is better than the overhead of pcre though
<17> oh one condition!!! rejoice!
<12> fp-: Why do you feel the need for regular expressions?
<15> I don't necessarily have a need for it.. I just want whatever is quicker.
<15> I'm trying ot write very fast code in this app.
<15> so, preg is probably out then.
<15> I'll bring up my old condition
<1> You know what they say: Idle hands make premature optimizations.
<15> if ($name !== '..' && strpos($name, '.') === 0)
<12> yes, that, and a pair of rusty plyers.
<15> haha -- good one
<15> do you think I should just stick with that condition
<1> If it does what you want, then yes.
<15> so, what is going to be the right way to deal with {} in strings in PHP 6?
<17> fp-: strpos is a lot slower than {}
<15> I was guessing it would be strpos
<17> then if ($str{0} === '.' && $str != '..') {
<17> that is as fast as you will ever get it
<17> then if ($str[0] === '.' && $str != '..') { for php6
<15> will that work for php5.1 now?
<5> indeed
Return to
#php
or
Go to some related
logs:
rwwrtwin deb.
totem-config
#math
grub error 13 FAT
damn small linux apm: overridden by acpi
VisualBoyAdvance dapper
gentoo unmerge xfce4
enforcing mode requested but no policy loaded
MDB2 phpinfo
NVIDIA NV34 vxworks
|
|