Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106806
Return-Path: <cschneid@cschneid.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 37657 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2019 19:52:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.gna.ch) (62.12.172.119)
  by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2019 19:52:04 -0000
Received: from [10.0.1.55] (77-56-180-37.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.56.180.37])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by darkcity.gna.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9F6920A3A;
	Thu, 29 Aug 2019 19:24:30 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
In-Reply-To: <94054653-020b-78bb-9208-d0533b85be72@aegir.sexy>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 19:24:29 +0200
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <A5670EC4-30BB-4E21-AD0D-71EF1E56F2F0@cschneid.com>
References: <CAF+90c9Kc6m_bv=aJxbD3-RmnNXXLqv6mPjHp7U7qxX_ck27qw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c-+ewSj2oTASZMrENuaDRA3ys=LdAwwjjbVjA2v7Es+Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJHtznzx6u7h2dYtAMTtgpzGnVYgYRA0JvJ5p=4-koor-Wdnbw@mail.gmail.com>
 <33b4068a-3b32-4904-a033-4ff3f28e1161@aegir.sexy>
 <1EDD1FE6-9AB8-4CDF-8EE4-416C18390725@gmail.com>
 <bb322cbd-c283-ea77-8889-619f3927854c@aegir.sexy>
 <CAJHtznxf=FAL_aWz1eL5fS1xQ1NRKae+4UqE7pVSn-9cG7ScpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <94054653-020b-78bb-9208-d0533b85be72@aegir.sexy>
To: Aegir Leet <aegir@aegir.sexy>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reclassifying engine warnings
From: cschneid@cschneid.com (Christian Schneider)

Am 29.08.2019 um 18:25 schrieb Aegir Leet <aegir@aegir.sexy>:
> Before reading the responses to this thread, I had honestly never
> encountered a PHP developer who thought using uninitialized variables
> was fine.

Now you have. Nice to meet you.

> I knew it worked, but I always considered this to basically be
> the PHP equivalent of undefined behavior in C. And I don't think =
anyone
> would get mad if a new GCC version broke the way they were abusing UB.

That's where you are mixing things up: It is well-defined behaviour, =
even if you personally don't like it.

A better analogy is static variables in C. It is common (and not =
considered bad) practice to not explicitly set a variable to 0 as that =
is the default value.

Example: =
https://github.com/git/git/blob/6d5b26420848ec3bc7eae46a7ffa54f20276249d/d=
elta-islands.c#L26

- Chris