Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118568 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25375 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2022 11:14:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 6 Sep 2022 11:14:29 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D980A1804FF for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 04:14:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-pf1-f175.google.com (mail-pf1-f175.google.com [209.85.210.175]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 04:14:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-f175.google.com with SMTP id c198so1154965pfc.13 for ; Tue, 06 Sep 2022 04:14:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=NYK288Zg7yRJln+gvIaIkuv7MUM+/bQhmYS4OF3fNI8=; b=h2zcM8DRIhO+yX9LFEQVMNZxEMLS2ze85OQdJ0badpPvvSL4+KsVyUvYhWstXnTrvj wCeY+YrG+MRLkrMYvAflF1YWQp5oE2a0NZMiEpH/b6JX34jRW1AJlnATcykIf3OnCsge 16WSucRjaACcZUDGIjYqQ9CCaQtbTXpuwW/d28cEqe+poVuWYrZ2uqr0kgC0IpXQLaz4 yrGBWEhUCKFUSfp3oy//m/LRh9pVA3AZyLgewqBkRDuZaNnHl5qM+/nJWc9uFiq4P4dp QUFCisR/i7Hjn0Av6YvWWZJTfwPFwi3nb5IHQTqH6y9PtjhTCCwkHGIGO7+UZuctMm48 rohg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=NYK288Zg7yRJln+gvIaIkuv7MUM+/bQhmYS4OF3fNI8=; b=FSlSuCSDx6lhmXYDrk2jx6RwHX/PgsYDFHjQKolYTNiKVEtTAF+/WjfTXs/h/xm/s/ S29CYnPPxJ4MccpmxeZb9k54/GaSk1hdQlxBnMEc3u0mU4jpWp21/D39Ak12zqpIqEse 0JMD/vJ8876NDKu4Q5J4irnnAAtz45Sq+SZBQNugzw7aiQsRvKRbTnxxxxCv+yqcncIw 41CKY0OH8KOn4lZ3csR9asYbuCvP9vYW0Ar4VZYQzYJpnAW6T0RMR/bhLUTCCuBtUezr BK1k5wlWWP/6OxISSAgB5jrYPQhA3moSCo8NMm39Vf/tPsL7aJyA6nVvDEfx1YkIOiQe CqPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo35XbiUF57fZp7kh/OFBTct/Qxw1RzQ8lQgTdse4s0HNziFDn77 xAsGyQgpO5xMphIpjRelVvFOyGpz9WC14+PCBrjNM102Z7A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7py5c/4ZkqKxATaLIl2dMA8/c4SLrdU3gxWcXRYWoxxfiogPzovEb7mdUoCgULne3JwvXUc4lMFVVKyjsh98c= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:a05:b0:534:b1ad:cfac with SMTP id p5-20020a056a000a0500b00534b1adcfacmr53724215pfh.35.1662462864245; Tue, 06 Sep 2022 04:14:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <530b3a9d-0ee4-6061-8c69-df672d238032@bastelstu.be> In-Reply-To: <530b3a9d-0ee4-6061-8c69-df672d238032@bastelstu.be> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:14:13 +0100 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000079c52a05e8004ca7" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC [Discussion]: Improve unserialize() error handling From: george.banyard@gmail.com ("G. P. B.") --00000000000079c52a05e8004ca7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 5 Sept 2022 at 18:20, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus wrote: > Hi > > I've now written up an RFC as a follow-up for the "What type of > Exception to use for unserialize() failure?" thread [1]: > > ---- > > RFC: Improve unserialize() error handling > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_unserialize_error_handling > > Proof of concept implementation is in: > > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/9425 > > Discussion period for that RFC is officially opened up. > > ---- > > The primary point of discussion in the previous mailing list thread and > in the PR comments is whether unserialize() should continue to emit > E_WARNING or whether that should consistently be changed to an > Exception. As of now I plan to explicitly vote on this and the RFC > contains some opinions on that matter. > > Best regards > Tim D=C3=BCsterhus > > [1] https://externals.io/message/118311 > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > Thank you Tim for the thorough investigation. I didn't know how bad the situation was in regards to unserialization. So I'm now tending in favour of promoting the notice/warnings to exceptions as it is currently extremely hard to handle the behaviour correctly. Best regards, George P. Banyard --00000000000079c52a05e8004ca7--