Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101935
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain pmmaga.net designates 149.210.149.73 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c-he_Sp=uXpuQSLfscUYr1nv5f1AuLB1WA+w2P0=ff-DQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJd4=YaK6GCHC-n+PF+mSC_1VDtZpUPCkPyWRSK6G7dzuvNFXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c-he_Sp=uXpuQSLfscUYr1nv5f1AuLB1WA+w2P0=ff-DQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 17:25:37 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJd4=YZaK5oCnotafrBhJ8XqRa6cTQZ4Tr0VZQfS-agSFqVCZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045f4f7c98f77c056620cda0"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Arrays starting with a negative index
From: mail@pmmaga.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_Magalh=C3=A3es?=)

--f403045f4f7c98f77c056620cda0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I like the change, but I'm concerned about the technical impact that
> deprecation notice will have. An error handler can convert the notice into
> an exception, which means that zend_hash_next_index_insert is now going
> to be a throwing operation. Apart from the fact that the currently linked
> implementation is not exception-safe (if the deprecation notice throws, the
> element is still inserted), it's quite likely that at least some of the
> >250 uses of zend_hash_next_index_insert will not deal with exceptions
> correctly.
>
> Nikita
>

Hi Nikita, thanks for the feedback.

About the implementation of the deprecation notice, I agree that it should
be updated to be exception-safe.

About the issue if it being dealt with correctly everywhere, I'm honestly
more inclined towards dealing with it when/if it becomes a problem. I think
the number of users that 1) Start an array with a negative number, 2) Use
implicit keys afterwards and 3) Promote Notices to Exceptions must be a
very very small subset. Would you consider this an acceptable approach for
this specific case?

Thanks,
Pedro

--f403045f4f7c98f77c056620cda0--