Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:100091 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 92141 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2017 17:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Jul 2017 17:54:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=vchkpw@developersdesk.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=vchkpw@developersdesk.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain developersdesk.com designates 204.228.229.4 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: vchkpw@developersdesk.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 204.228.229.4 lessa.developersdesk.com Received: from [204.228.229.4] ([204.228.229.4:58743] helo=mail.developersdesk.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3C/78-40376-94A7B795 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:54:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 18355 invoked by uid 89); 28 Jul 2017 17:54:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.150?) (vchkpw@developersdesk.com@160.3.204.49) by 0 with ESMTPA; 28 Jul 2017 17:54:13 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <3a040cfc-9c43-d189-3950-69c86b51c825@rhsoft.net> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 11:54:03 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3a040cfc-9c43-d189-3950-69c86b51c825@rhsoft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Changes to SuperGlobals for PHP 8 From: vchkpw@developersdesk.com (Rick Widmer) On 7/28/2017 10:42 AM, lists@rhsoft.net wrote: > > > Am 28.07.2017 um 18:21 schrieb Kalle Sommer Nielsen: >> 2017-07-28 17:11 GMT+02:00 Sara Golemon : >>> I'm sure there will be many strong opinions on this, but let's move >>> this to a new thread. :D >>> >>> 1. This would be an 8.0 change as it does represent a significant BC >>> change. >>> 2. We can discuss the possibility of INI options or other mitigation >>> strategies for misbehaving code bases (and they do exist). >>> 3. I'm definitely not decided on what I'd like from default session >>> behavior. An error isn't out of the question, for sure. >> >> I for one thing it makes a lot of sense to make superglobals >> read-only, writing to them seems more like a hack anyway and should be >> avoided > > wrong question! > > the right questions are > > * are you fored to do so > * are you harmed by the possibility > > and only if you can answer both with "yes" it's worth to cosindr changes > breaking a ton of perfect working code > What he said. That would break almost everything I've written.