Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125150
Message-ID: <828A2555-E7CC-4DD8-AE1B-8D50EB7EDC6F@koalephant.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_DF43A101-50DF-416E-9305-1CDEAC018520"
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Concept] Flip relative function lookup order (global,
 then local)
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 23:35:02 +0700
In-Reply-To: <48F2A153-D33C-47CA-AB0A-67B85258D8E9@getmailspring.com>
Cc: "Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]" <imsop.php@rwec.co.uk>,
 "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
To: John Coggeshall <john@coggeshall.org>
References: <63DAE337-B117-4380-8735-186DC30FE0B7@rwec.co.uk>
 <48F2A153-D33C-47CA-AB0A-67B85258D8E9@getmailspring.com>
From: php-lists@koalephant.com (Stephen Reay)


--Apple-Mail=_DF43A101-50DF-416E-9305-1CDEAC018520
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii



> On 23 Aug 2024, at 23:13, John Coggeshall <john@coggeshall.org> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
> On Aug 23 2024, at 11:49 am, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] =
<imsop.php@rwec.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
> And most users don't object to using a leading backslash, they just =
(quite reasonably) have no idea what impact it has on the ability of the =
engine to optimise their code.
>=20
> I think this is a misread, and I don't think you can argue that there =
is a clear understanding of "most users" here. While I admit I too don't =
have real data to back this up, I would be more likely to believe "most =
users" would absolutely object to being forced into using a leading =
backslash and would find it non-sensical that you must add a backslash =
for the engine to do the "right thing" (in this case, optimize their =
code with a security benefit), vs just doing the right thing by default.
>=20

Hi John,

Now please don't misunderstand me, I am not advocating for a change to =
drop the fallback to global symbols. I wouldn't be against such a change =
but I don't think it's a problem that needs to be solved right now.

But if that were the proposal, I have to ask about something you said:

> would find it non-sensical that you must add a backslash for the =
engine to do the "right thing" (in this case, optimize their code with a =
security benefit), vs just doing the right thing by default.=20

What do you mean by this? What is "the right thing"?

Are you saying that you think people would expect an unqualified =
function name to automatically act like a global function name, and =
never check for a local namespaced function of the same name? Just to be =
clear, you understand that is the literal opposite of how =
classes/traits/interfaces work in PHP, yes?

I'm not saying that isn't necessarily how people think, I have literally =
zero data about this besides my own thoughts, but it seems like a =
bizarre idea that people would *expect* function name resolution to work =
completely opposite to how class/class-like name resolution works.


Cheers

Stephen=20=

--Apple-Mail=_DF43A101-50DF-416E-9305-1CDEAC018520
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=us-ascii

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii"></head><body style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><br =
id=3D"lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div>On 23 Aug 2024, at 23:13, John Coggeshall =
&lt;john@coggeshall.org&gt; wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div><br><br><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote_attribution">On Aug 23 2024, at 11:49 am, Rowan =
Tommins [IMSoP] &lt;imsop.php@rwec.co.uk&gt; =
wrote:</div><blockquote><div><br><div>And most users don't object to =
using a leading backslash, they just (quite reasonably) have no idea =
what impact it has on the ability of the engine to optimise their =
code.</div></div></blockquote><div><br><div>I think this is a misread, =
and I don't think you can argue that there is a clear understanding of =
"most users" here. While I admit I too don't have real data to back this =
up, I would be more likely to believe "most users" would absolutely =
object to being forced into using a leading backslash and would find it =
non-sensical that you must add a backslash for the engine to do the =
"right thing" (in this case, optimize their code with a security =
benefit), vs just doing the right thing by default. =
</div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div>Hi =
John,</div><div><br></div><div>Now please don't misunderstand me, I am =
not advocating for a change to drop the fallback to global symbols. I =
wouldn't be against such a change but I don't think it's a problem that =
needs to be solved right now.</div><div><br></div><div>But if that were =
the proposal, I have to ask about something you =
said:</div><div><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite">would find it =
non-sensical that you must add a backslash for the engine to do the =
"right thing" (in this case, optimize their code with a security =
benefit), vs just doing the right thing by =
default.&nbsp;</blockquote><div><br></div><div>What do you mean by this? =
What is "the right thing"?</div><div><br></div><div>Are you saying that =
you think people would expect an unqualified function name to =
automatically act like a global function name, and never check for a =
local namespaced function of the same name? Just to be clear, you =
understand that is the literal opposite of how classes/traits/interfaces =
work in PHP, yes?</div><div><br></div><div>I'm not saying that isn't =
necessarily how people think, I have literally zero data about this =
besides my own thoughts, but it seems like a bizarre idea that people =
would *expect* function name resolution to work completely opposite to =
how class/class-like name resolution =
works.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div>=
<div>Stephen&nbsp;</div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_DF43A101-50DF-416E-9305-1CDEAC018520--