Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:126717
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.400.131.1.6\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Consensus on argument validation for built-in functions
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:29:26 +0100
References: <CAPTD5yHhpcJJDNWMCpQSrkGyY5+YtgKUy1OKYv5t03KyzoAXbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <XOTiGCaoOV5bvCQP2nMZW7AzIoOdH5la7sgmJ8KK51Z6n9zJLiAM7cYTiUhH5zsrrMbMUZe257bmPe8SgcNgN2IqNzPUty68egntFngnsXU=@gpb.moe>
 <C3E24D9F-3D72-401F-81A9-CAA245308703@cschneid.com>
 <041d1a8c-dd43-4592-b997-ad4d2f91aeac@app.fastmail.com>
 <C0CFBD16-810E-4D4D-B818-4CB0E89DE25A@rwec.co.uk>
 <CG7fDapdXYGFwt0ryH-8s-dXCBrVw7gSIpgYYvKRDg_mlTjjuyro5uy1V5JLKzf21if2GLbjNv5zJ6M-7Szkj5URUdyXQWIZ0_b2wNUKbVE=@gpb.moe>
To: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <CG7fDapdXYGFwt0ryH-8s-dXCBrVw7gSIpgYYvKRDg_mlTjjuyro5uy1V5JLKzf21if2GLbjNv5zJ6M-7Szkj5URUdyXQWIZ0_b2wNUKbVE=@gpb.moe>
Message-ID: <F4ADAEAA-0E91-467B-9DCE-10D91347BB88@cschneid.com>
From: cschneid@cschneid.com (Christian Schneider)

Am 11.03.2025 um 12:54 schrieb Gina P. Banyard <internals@gpb.moe>:
> Taking the example of ext/pcntl again, if it were a standalone =
extension, having it follow semver is a way more reasonable proposition.
> Because we could just release 2 versions the same day, a x.y+1.0 =
introducing a warning, and a x+1.0.0 which would convert them into =
proper errors.
> Meaning as a user, you could be running whatever PHP version and have =
the stricter behaviour, or upgrade PHP while still holding the ext/pcntl =
version behind while you deal with the issues.

I live in a world where a) people don't always control the PHP version =
they are using (hosted websites) and b) are using more and more packages =
which have to stay compatible for (e.g. security) updates to be =
applicable. My (sad) experience is that semver *does not* solve this, it =
just provides the concept of differentiating different types of changes =
and their respective compatibility assumptions.

To be honest the pcntl example sounds like worst of both worlds:
- Maintainers would have two (and later maybe even more) versions to =
maintain (for how long?). I'd rather have one version at a time and if I =
do not want to forget switching the warning to an exception at a =
specific point there are ample ways of doing this, e.g. a =
TODO/FIXME/whatever you want to call it marker somewhere which is =
automatically reported once the given criteria (time, version, ...) is =
met.
- Would this be the only difference between these two version? If Yes =
then why have them in the first place (if you want to be strict about =
warnings then just convert them to an exception, that's easy enough). If =
No then you open yet another can of worms, e.g. one package requiring =
x.y+1 and another package requiring x+1.0. Been there, hated it :-)

Regards,
- Chris