Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120175
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH5C8xXtCVHaxwzmAW_eBxp_D6p7kww9svND=3AEeC9X6--YXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <ffa8138a-f1b6-3926-bc2f-558ffca344b0@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ffa8138a-f1b6-3926-bc2f-558ffca344b0@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 12:32:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CALKiJKqnxKhEUm7MY3-en2muhfGW6WU6PrPDt9s4Cr0oScjTHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bfd1ce05fab44b7f"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Deprecate functions with overloaded signatures
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins)

--000000000000bfd1ce05fab44b7f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 at 09:16, Rowan Tommins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote:

> On a different point, I think "assert_options" is a peculiar name for
> either setting or getting a single option, and would suggest it be
> replaced with two new functions, assert_get_option and
> assert_set_option.
>


Further to this, I've realised that the manual is currently a bit confusing
regarding the interaction of ini_set('zend.assertions', ...),
ini_set('assert.active', ...), and assert_options(ASSERT_ACTIVE, ...)

Either way, all the options to assert_options are documented as having an
equivalent ini setting, so is this function actually needed at all, or
should users be encouraged to use ini_get / ini_set directly?

https://www.php.net/assert_options

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]

--000000000000bfd1ce05fab44b7f--