Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:106944
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c9Kc6m_bv=aJxbD3-RmnNXXLqv6mPjHp7U7qxX_ck27qw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c_KHYm1SLOKkZXM6xurYiDTX3=hbijpD8rT1OSUHSod_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CEC35EF9-9956-44BE-8C8E-EE5FC3D5A7C7@gmail.com> <D5DDA318-E953-4AB8-873F-7CA7264722E2@koalephant.com>
 <E30D9A22-9842-4A67-ABA5-A339875FFE12@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E30D9A22-9842-4A67-ABA5-A339875FFE12@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:50:55 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPKYkKw2Czxs5t0_mTWV9_G_mRrRF+yLzRfJfHovsBLf3GzMxQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Claude Pache <claude.pache@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Reay <php-lists@koalephant.com>, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e95a0605925b6d81"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Reclassifying engine warnings
From: chasepeeler@gmail.com (Chase Peeler)

--000000000000e95a0605925b6d81
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Claude Pache <claude.pache@gmail.com> wrote=
:

>
>
> > Le 12 sept. 2019 =C3=A0 10:17, Stephen Reay <php-lists@koalephant.com> =
a
> =C3=A9crit :
> >
> >
> >
> > I=E2=80=99ve seen a number of people that have concerns about PHP throw=
ing
> actual errors (as opposed to notices) because they try to use a
> variable/offset that doesn=E2=80=99t exist, and of course there is often =
a proposal
> to have a declare statement or something similar, to allow their =E2=80=
=9Ccode
> style=E2=80=9D to run without errors.
> >
> >
> > So, my proposal to the situation is to introduce a single declare that
> solves that problem, once and for all.
> >
> >
> >       declare(sloppy=3D1);
> >
> >
> > This would suppress any errors about undefined variables, array offsets=
,
> would reverse the =E2=80=9Cbare words" change when encountering an undefi=
ned
> constant, etc. Heck, for good measure this mode could even re-implement
> register_globals and magic_quotes, because why not?
> >

This still forces people to opt-in to something that has been supported for
20+ years, and there isn't even a consensus on it being "sloppy" to begin
with.

>

>
> >
> > If you want to write sloppy code, that is entirely your prerogative, bu=
t
> please just own it for what it is, and stop pretending that it=E2=80=99s =
some
> herculean task to either define variables/offsets first; or check if
> they=E2=80=99re defined; or use an appropriate method to access them that
> specifically allows for undefined variables/offsets (i.e. the ?? and ??=
=3D
> operators)
> >
> >
>
> Declare(sloppy=3Dyeah) is not granular enough. To all: please, do underst=
and
> that everything is not black or white; this remark is not directed
> specifically to that particular issue, this is an attitude I see regularl=
y
> on that mailing list.
>
> There is no such thing as =E2=80=9Cone true strict coding standard=E2=80=
=9D and =E2=80=9Cone
> legacy lax coding standard=E2=80=9D. For instance:
>
> * As time passes, we learn by experience what features were plain blunder=
s
> (magic_quotes?), what features should have been more strict for the sake =
of
> catching bugs without imposing too much burden on users, what features
> could have been more strict, although that would impose to write lot of
> boiler code, etc. This process does not belong exclusively to some past
> dark age of sloppy and unsecure coding practices.
>
> * The degree of wanted strictness vary depending on occasions. For exampl=
e
> when I=E2=80=99m writing a throw-away script, some notices are okay to in=
dicate
> possible problems, but I=E2=80=99m not going to write boilerplate code (o=
r, worse,
> put a @ in front of everything) just for the sake of silencing them. (But=
 I
> *certainly* do not want stupid things like mistyped constants converted t=
o
> string literals.) On the other hand, when I=E2=80=99m writing a critical =
part of an
> application, I am careful to write down everything precisely, and having =
to
> write explicitly and once for all that, yes, this precise variable must
> have that default value, is a minimal part of the time passed to write,
> re-read and review the code.
>
> What??? You mean it's possible to write strict code even when the engine
doesn't force you to? But I got the feeling that wasn't possible and we
needed to force EVERYONE to code this way.


> =E2=80=94Claude
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--=20
Chase Peeler
chasepeeler@gmail.com

--000000000000e95a0605925b6d81--