Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118594 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58887 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2022 11:04:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 Sep 2022 11:04:05 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A6621804FF for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2022 04:04:05 -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-ed1-f49.google.com (mail-ed1-f49.google.com [209.85.208.49]) (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 ; Sat, 10 Sep 2022 04:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-f49.google.com with SMTP id e18so6102088edj.3 for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2022 04:04:04 -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=ADlA34Kcup8X8R56HHudiSl3Lxh+Zd01NatRfxuVTxY=; b=Sqsfs8XAO5af27R3kKaOvhYGLmC4QzV6SUjrLzgUJrc7Wn1SJHkMd8XNl2NXmhcCgt GaRO43PzT3mTJ7fxHKWRApLMEn6ORQTmHcINHNw0N06UarBsayPDEivLPKK5tU9PKnzc ohYJFJp5gM98I+PW2IWJVpC7IGTLmPhyDNXCwUeG7r7VBYeoRKl3UknInar6aPr4yhHJ lu0QJSaPDiwf2f71e7d3DYWHjLXVDfuS6YhBtvl57uIcjccZfGggWadrlO6iKu9P6quo Qorhq6wCHcwN8NDp9WCJlWGYx/sRR/EazN2uNyzhojIRdLeP1gVKgm2nbdZhpeF2Gj95 ph/A== 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=ADlA34Kcup8X8R56HHudiSl3Lxh+Zd01NatRfxuVTxY=; b=Yk3OyZJU2cCud3QNvNwBgde2BRKME5/Ear4kCeo2SZ0ZCH+9eakTQn7nMT1nKkYyH2 b6FmbezcQSxeB+yvc4MSm4Jua5saJdf4XHGrIw2CTAsG4RUwn/PmJxM399Vx3Wi9JfJO I/RIVAu7OAPwHBosuCRTY0H+QdN+tGSh5znbfOIFdxXESN9r1oULeFuICXX9VsyB3iTY mbN/44glyofv4/b1HdnMsLsgFBnptUiq+WObORnXCxGYC4lgATobFGZ4jPePi3gpEQ6u O7i55zbHZg0ewkFFcbrdPspzlIOdie8KWuF/42sVtXYTi8bz2ShrrCSfCHHi0SYzxM7Q e2Pw== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo2wA9nGp1LbclQww/8rkgrMSfsyRH3zn10JhSoqqBO8AJyvowAZ MrmgpHPIL7QCrrjo2MeAPwq+gw91CmJGjKhiZRpDzsl7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5xdCXmzQJWhVmvEUVrxCI7Osh7p5n21GtyloRoDmXyUgfsTeISCK/abcvue9MV5mwtpxTzuiovmmUhx3N/TD4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:184:b0:442:fd54:2a21 with SMTP id r4-20020a056402018400b00442fd542a21mr14774374edv.129.1662807843173; Sat, 10 Sep 2022 04:04:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <530b3a9d-0ee4-6061-8c69-df672d238032@bastelstu.be> <628f27cd-d7f0-4a75-bf5b-f4812ff459a5@www.fastmail.com> <2474d6fc-a61d-19e8-b903-ff389dbb9ff6@bastelstu.be> In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2022 12:03:54 +0100 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d279ce05e8509e2a" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC [Discussion]: Improve unserialize() error handling From: dragoonis@gmail.com (Paul Dragoonis) --000000000000d279ce05e8509e2a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 8 Sep 2022, 17:18 Tim D=C3=BCsterhus, wrote: > Hi > > On 9/7/22 23:44, Larry Garfield wrote: > > Either I guess? Honestly we should decide that in advance on the list. > :-) E_WARNING+Exception in 9 is what I'd probably favor, with "Exception > now" as a second choice. > > > > I'm a new-ish contributor here in internals, so I don't know how things > were done in the past for similar situations/issues. > Welcome, Tim :-) Do give it more thought regarding the callbacks what Nikolas said, sleep on it. Not saying it matters, but also double check how error handling MAY differ when in a Class::_unserialize() context. Maybe it doesn't diff, I haven't checked in a while, but food for thought. In any case, good cleanup initiative. > I'm not sure, though if it makes sense to already decide on something > for PHP 9. If it's not baked into code shortly after the vote finishes, > then people might forget that "there's something that still needs to be > done". For a deprecation one can at least go through all the > deprecations once PHP 9 opens, as a deprecation effectively is defined > to be a removal in the next major. For a warning this is less obvious. > > Personally my first choice would be "Straight to Exception", so I might > not be the best person to decide on that :-) > > Best regards > Tim D=C3=BCsterhus > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > --000000000000d279ce05e8509e2a--