Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124601
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <USzt7tZZlO1DmAbSTLhD-bqa23FqZn0zk2aah8Ndxgk9c7RY5PefQ8MjbYPUYAzr2_m4Cf-5AI4PuNBTS84rim_FNS6RaT-cWSv714HEvvU=@gpb.moe>
 <1a88918e-e808-d778-45e1-53797660e093@php.net> <CAPrKfG5Cw_nU7g7FR+t4C1-YZ8CDsDO_-sRs=yEsHO5kCTZL+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <95147d9d-d6e8-4396-bf0b-409c33679f90@bastelstu.be> <CAPrKfG4TijmZ_N9512_Fk9MBUNg=E6PjNTy-bCbV8CAj9_wX8A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPrKfG4TijmZ_N9512_Fk9MBUNg=E6PjNTy-bCbV8CAj9_wX8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 00:09:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPrKfG7Hi0SGbLA31V-9KjHM50QaX+Q=PptuO4+VMOrz7d9eBA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Deprecations for PHP 8.4
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= <tim@bastelstu.be>
Cc: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f4f4b8061e21335a"
From: sarkedev@gmail.com (Peter Stalman)

--000000000000f4f4b8061e21335a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:35=E2=80=AFPM Peter Stalman <sarkedev@gmail.com>=
 wrote:

> If their learning insticast
>

*instincts.

I should also clarify, I'm not against deprecations in general.  However,
the benefits should outweigh the costs.  If something is getting
unmaintainable, no longer supported, inherently insecure etc, those are all
good reasons.  `password_hash` as mentioned was a great addition, and
should/did solve this very issue.  Even someone reading a blog tutorial
from 11 years ago would be able to see this used properly.

But md5/sha1 are not bad functions, they do *exactly* what they say on the
box.  Being able to do the exact same thing by spelling the function
slightly differently isn't even deprecating them, just deprecating an
alias. They're only *bad* if used in a *bad way*, and that to me is not
enough of a reason.

Thanks,
Peter

--000000000000f4f4b8061e21335a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:35=E2=80=AFPM =
Peter Stalman &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:sarkedev@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">s=
arkedev@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1=
px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"lt=
r">If their learning insticast=C2=A0</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div=
><div>*instincts.</div><div><br></div><div>I should also clarify, I&#39;m n=
ot against deprecations in general.=C2=A0 However, the benefits should outw=
eigh=C2=A0the costs.=C2=A0 If something is getting unmaintainable, no longe=
r supported, inherently=C2=A0insecure etc, those are all good reasons.=C2=
=A0 `password_hash` as mentioned was a great addition, and should/did solve=
 this very issue.=C2=A0 Even someone reading a blog tutorial from 11 years =
ago would be able to see this used properly.</div><div><br></div><div>But m=
d5/sha1 are not bad functions, they do *exactly* what they say on the box.=
=C2=A0 Being able to do the exact same thing by spelling the function sligh=
tly differently isn&#39;t even deprecating them,=C2=A0just deprecating an a=
lias. They&#39;re only *bad* if used in a *bad way*, and that to me is not =
enough of a reason.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Peter</div><=
div><br></div></div></div>

--000000000000f4f4b8061e21335a--