Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123311
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 14:45:44 +0000
To: Saki Takamachi <saki@sakiot.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Transform exit() from a language construct into a standard function
Message-ID: <woUy8XU0mJUmB30UEhlm9aVGW4CrUirpGe9RTrT0ObGUfJM7U05Qp2Lg1ppNh7y087oBsL4UVz65IyMzGLqPv5DKZjJj3tfY-YkrlIRsru4=@gpb.moe>
In-Reply-To: <CCE326F2-8D39-47C7-A8BB-17F78FA0EE8D@sakiot.com>
References: <GUMp_LJKefk4aLz9P9MA-zonKuik6uUNWZTtOAx-IeIhjPFsgfT3HHECPpyGF_ujq-LxI6tzBxMYgL5CMVGRkyzxSugweKix_YUGo2rXnb4=@gpb.moe> <CCE326F2-8D39-47C7-A8BB-17F78FA0EE8D@sakiot.com>
Feedback-ID: 96993444:user:proton
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: internals@gpb.moe ("Gina P. Banyard")

On Thursday, 9 May 2024 at 16:18, Saki Takamachi <saki@sakiot.com> wrote:

> Hi Gina,
>=20
> > Hello Internals,
> >=20
> > I would like to formally propose my idea for exit() as a function broug=
ht up to the list on 2024-02-24 [1] with the following RFC:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/exit-as-function
> >=20
> > There have been some slight tweaks to the implementation, namely that t=
he transformation from a "constant" to a function is done at compile time a=
nd we do not hook into the behaviour of constants any longer.
> >=20
> > Let me know what you think.
> >=20
> > Best regards,
> >=20
> > Gina P. Banyard
> >=20
> > [1] https://externals.io/message/122483
>=20
>=20
> I generally agree :)
>=20
> My only concern is that if this function throws an error and I catch it, =
won't it proceed against the user's intentions about it. I am concerned tha=
t this may lead to data corruption and personal information leaks due to un=
intentional data being inserted into the DB.
>=20
> `try { exit([]); } catch (Throwable) { // }`
>=20
> Probably no one likes to write code like this, and even if there are, the=
re are probably very few, but code that is written with the assumption that=
 exit will always stop processing may be a little dangerous.
>=20
> Is it nonsense to always stop processing even if an error occurs? Or, how=
 about creating an uncatchable exception class specifically for exits? Or i=
s this level of risk negligible?
>=20
> I am writing down the ideas I came up with, so please excuse me if there =
are any mistakes in my understanding.
>=20
> Regard,
>=20
> Saki

You can already escape an exit() call, either by setting an error handler t=
hat throws, or by passing a non-stringable object.
See: https://3v4l.org/vR3up

Best regards,

Gina P. Banyard