|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-06 09:26:48
|
Hi all,
I have been using PHP/Java bridge for a while, I guess a lot ppl might have
the similar feeling as me about it which is once it's set up properly, it
works great:)
I have installed v4, and v5.0 from source on different platforms, without
tomcat or servlet, and none of them required me to have a line like
"require_once('Java.inc')" in my php scripts. Although I did notice that in
the FAQ (in the source package) it does say "Java.inc must be included
before it can be used", it worked well for me without that line and I took
it that "it" in that claim must be meaning something else:)
Everything was fine until today when I started using 5.2. I did the same
configuration as I did before, and it seems it's started properly (from
phpinfo()), but this time it didn't do the trick, without that line I
couldn't use anything starting with "java", like "java_require()", it keeps
saying "*Fatal error*: Call to undefined function java_require()". So I
copied Java.inc in the source package to my script directory and added that
line, everything started working again.
So anyone could please explain why I didn't need Java.inc but now I have to
have it? If I do need it, where is the best place to find it and to store
it, in other words, will it change over time? why did the installation
script not copy it to a proper directory? Maybe for ppl using tomcat or
servlet, they can extract it from JavaBridge.jar, isn't it troublesome for
ppl without them?
Thanks.
Rong
|
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-06 11:59:32
|
Hi,
I don't understand this problem. The linux setup creates java/Java.inc in the standard include
path. The PHP windows versions, which don't have a proper include path, use the current working
directory instead.
What's the problem with this setting?
Regards,
Jost Boekemeier
Machen Sie Yahoo! zu Ihrer Startseite. Los geht's:
http://de.yahoo.com/set
|
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-06 15:06:57
|
well, for v4 and v5.0 i didn't need to include Java.inc, in fact i didn't have the file at all and it worked well, weird... On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM, < php...@li...> wrote: > Hi, > > I don't understand this problem. The linux setup creates java/Java.inc in > the standard include > path. The PHP windows versions, which don't have a proper include path, > use the current working > directory instead. > > What's the problem with this setting? > > > Regards, > Jost Boekemeier > > > > > Machen Sie Yahoo! zu Ihrer Startseite. Los geht's: > http://de.yahoo.com/set > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > php-java-bridge-users mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/php-java-bridge-users > |
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-06 16:23:12
|
Hi,
> well, for v4 and v5.0 i didn't need to include Java.inc,
yes, this was a bug in java.so. Please see the NEWS file for version 5.2.0 for details.
However, unless you use PHP 4, you need to include Java.inc, if you want to access the Java class
or the java() function.
Regards,
Jost Boekemeier
Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails auf dem Handy.
www.yahoo.de/go
|
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-07 02:24:09
|
Hi, thanks, that explains it. I was just wondering why would you call it a bug:) - cos having to include Java.inc in every script is really annoying, why can't you push all the java functions into java.so? Rong On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:23 AM, <php...@li...> wrote: > Hi, > > > well, for v4 and v5.0 i didn't need to include Java.inc, > > yes, this was a bug in java.so. Please see the NEWS file for version 5.2.0for details. > > However, unless you use PHP 4, you need to include Java.inc, if you want > to access the Java class > or the java() function. > > > Regards, > Jost Boekemeier > > > > Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails auf dem Handy. > www.yahoo.de/go > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > php-java-bridge-users mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/php-java-bridge-users > |
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-07 08:31:38
|
Hi,
>, why
> can't you push all the java functions into java.so?
Because of the additional overhead for class registration.
Do you really want to create a Java class in each of your scripts?
Regards,
Jost Boekemeier
Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails auf dem Handy.
www.yahoo.de/go
|
|
From: <php...@li...> - 2008-03-07 11:11:45
|
thanks for the reply. i could be wrong, it's like moving the overhead to the script rather than leaving it in java.so On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 7:31 PM, <php...@li...> wrote: > Hi, > > >, why > > can't you push all the java functions into java.so? > > Because of the additional overhead for class registration. > > Do you really want to create a Java class in each of your scripts? > > > Regards, > Jost Boekemeier > > > > Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails auf dem Handy. > www.yahoo.de/go > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > php-java-bridge-users mailing list > php...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/php-java-bridge-users > |