Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:26553
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 64.233.166.183 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: good
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=googlemail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=ZeiNVMRYede3C/+h+Fr/ictYLzwPMXaXtKsdZG3fpr+ZXjFVh9MDsl+0L4Lq8EEW/liXFaBH70+iKUCc4PYW2uR+1VK2I6X7qGxR/S0RBRZzSCHzAAHFg27O0d8uAw3t6NjoG+gRGTYGl29hm7McZGz48rlIrzhVocYRoIIWT5g=
Message-ID: <10845a340611140041p4cc13daft875f4fc99f1c8d19@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 08:41:32 +0000
Reply-To: RQuadling@GoogleMail.com
To: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>
Cc: "Antony Dovgal" <antony@zend.com>, php-dev <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <45597FA6.90808@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <4558E5E7.5040809@zend.com>
	 <10845a340611140024l4902ea09q600a43c5018e819c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45597FA6.90808@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] fgets()/fgetss() BC break in HEAD
From: rquadling@googlemail.com ("Richard Quadling")

Just because it has always done it doesn't mean it always will. That's
what BC's are about.

If this was to be a BC, having it mid version is not a good idea.
Maybe for V6 where a whole LOAD of things are going to change, making
it another part of the clean up process would be a better option.

On 14/11/06, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:
> > It seems utterly ridiculous to return maxlen-1.
> >
> > Whilst this is sure as hell a BC, it should work "properly". If I ask
> > for 10, I want 10. I wouldn't have asked for 10 otherwise. Having to
> > know the "magic" to get things to work is plainly bad magic.
>
> It always returned length-1, manual says length-1, so suddenly in
> version 5.2.1 it starts returning length instead. And now imagine
> somebody who tries to use this function in his scripts. He should start
> adding version checks to each invocation of this function or what?
> Doesn't seem very nice behavior to me.
>
> > Make the break. Deal with it. It was wrong and now it is fixed.
>
> Yes, and the way to deal with it is to restore the function to its
> previous functionality, according to documentation and the way it always
> worked. If you need exact number, you can always use fread. There's
> absolutely no reason to break 100% of working scripts (since nobody uses
> the new semantics and everybody uses the old) just to satisfy someone's
> sense of purity.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
> stas@zend.com  http://www.zend.com/
>
>


-- 
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"