Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106480
Return-Path: <r@roze.lv>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 95464 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2019 13:49:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO zeona.lv) (213.175.74.1)
  by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 9 Aug 2019 13:49:17 -0000
Received: from MezhRoze (unknown [10.8.0.69])
	by zeona.lv (Postfix) with ESMTP id E10F32009DAB7;
	Fri,  9 Aug 2019 14:16:39 +0300 (EEST)
To: "'Robert Korulczyk'" <robert@korulczyk.pl>,
	<internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAFPFaML19B_RehrUQLEy_oFae-H5r3+BpUGg=GF1js83cJpJqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEYWF=4cx_i=3rCfFKeBT0Jq0e4=P0PeY2wd6YEwog_VdA1+Dg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHtznzie34C92y2nTRXxhD99FEW-5hmruVatsrLDHcAKvTccQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEYWF=7S2SxzxU+TzRV0Rc7FNMvyZBkAENVTNbZKqrs71Uyijw@mail.gmail.com> <000001d54e5a$02ac09f0$08041dd0$@roze.lv> <2b5588d6-d667-321f-22f1-46a22bb797c5@korulczyk.pl>
In-Reply-To: <2b5588d6-d667-321f-22f1-46a22bb797c5@korulczyk.pl>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 14:16:40 +0300
Message-ID: <000001d54ea3$eb3480a0$c19d81e0$@roze.lv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AQHjzwR+XvJt6M7mF5GjTobLDXnEoQIpyUV8Alb9DGYB+yJwYQEzzSE9Ajo4a1amhk4vcA==
Content-Language: lv
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecate PHP's short open tags, again
From: r@roze.lv ("Reinis Rozitis")

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Korulczyk [mailto:robert@korulczyk.pl]
>
>
> Can you give an example where using `.user.ini` may create unexpected =
and hard
> to notice code leaks?

I did mention such example with the 'engine' setting ( =
https://www.php.net/manual/en/apache.configuration.php#ini.engine as =
it's PHP_INI_ALL ). Of course you could ask why would anyone do that =
(and afaik it's sapi specific) but technically it can happen just in one =
"hard to notice" subdirectory/tree.

Note that atm short_tags are by default enabled and the disable happens =
only in php(-cli).ini so unless one throws the ini configuration files =
around willy nilly it is a deliberate decision from administrator.=20



p.s. to clarify I'm not against changing the default value to disabled =
(to be consistent with the distributed ini-examples and (coding) =
recommendations) but I still don't understand what is the reason to deny =
for end-users the ability to change/re-enable this feature if they need =
it and choose so.

But according to some emails for some reasons the existence of short =
tags now has turned out to be a major language future/feature blocker .. =
so go figure.

rr