Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101867
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 04:15:57 -0300
Message-ID: <CAKbGgYhXjLhLZ2R107yheGh6iEWt_tnr_+NyXm=9k66MYb0MqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4f5e808e8802a540c056526e3c3"
Subject: About assert()
From: pslacerda@gmail.com (Pedro Lacerda)

--f4f5e808e8802a540c056526e3c3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi developers,

Trying to resolve the bug #75950 (that after long hours I found that I
couldn't reproduce), I observed that if `zend.assertions >= 0` the
generated code inside `assert()` was indeed executed even if `assert.active
= off`. Naturally the function arguments were evaluated before entering
into the `assert()` function.

https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=75950

The point is that will be possible to fully disable assertions setting
`assert.active = false` after initialization if we turn `assert` into a
statement. This can mantain fully backward compatibility. Calling
`assert_options(ASSERT_ACTIVE, true)` or `false` after initialization would
fully enable or disable the functionality. It seems the most sensible thing
to do.

By the way `assert` in Java and Python is an statement, and in C it isn't a
function.

So my question is what is the purpose of mantaining `assert()` a function,
there are any drawbacks of fully disabling it when `zend.assertions >= 0`?


PS: Strange that nobody cared in recent emails about the proposal to a
small increase of the testing coverage by doubling the testing time
duration, was somewhat interesting.

-- 
Atenciosamente,
Pedro Lacerda

--f4f5e808e8802a540c056526e3c3--