Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:37761
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.233 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=N2p+L8Fg6tBMdtZItBdDuyvOeu4pnBFIQ2ZhaJAW3cn3iaZjgjA4AhN53xKcntIzc7ZQUaJWR9EYgHR0VFzUIaOWj7VtvyscbUYD+HU7DF8HghqHS2FeqOVN8z0pjharQY0KLaQZshT3kODeuOlCr4ucZU7iGzURoQ8gKHODcpo=
Message-ID: <fe05d1540805201409x68047285k6ca0afaf2bc5061f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 23:09:18 +0200
To: "Philip Olson" <philip@roshambo.org>
Cc: "PHP internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <2A18662D-06D5-449B-9A55-864E8D091155@roshambo.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <5B2E59A9-BC46-447F-BEBC-C4149866A802@roshambo.org>
	 <fe05d1540805201353r4eb57110rf2e1d84c8558f457@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2A18662D-06D5-449B-9A55-864E8D091155@roshambo.org>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] magic quotes finale
From: pierre.php@gmail.com ("Pierre Joye")

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Philip Olson <philip@roshambo.org> wrote:
>
> On 20 May 2008, at 13:53, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>> hi Philip,
>>
>> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 9:55 PM, Philip Olson <philip@roshambo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello everyone-
>>>
>>> PHP 5.3 is approaching fast, so let's conclude our dealings with magical
>>> quotes... this should be the last time. Please have a look at the
>>> following
>>> RFC and discuss it within this thread.
>>>
>>> Magic Quotes in PHP 5.3 and beyond
>>> - http://wiki.php.net/rfc/magicquotes
>>>
>>> It recommends changes to both 5_3 and 6_0 branches, namely, removing
>>> E_DEPRECATED from the get_ magical quote functions. Silence means you're
>>> okay with the RFC being implemented.
>>
>> We already agreed on restoring them in HEAD but with a warning
>> (instead of the fatal error introduced by the removals). We still
>> leave the E_DEPRECATED in 5.3 as it is actually deprecated.
>
> I disagree that we agreed on this, as our last discussion was murky at best.
> Getting and setting are totally different and should be clarified as such...
> the RFC does this.

You can disagree if you wish, point is that this change is in my todos
as discussed in our last discussions (where Andi and all
participated). Don't get me wrong, the RFC is a good thing, I only try
to avoid yet another FUD about this topic.


Cheers,
-- 
Pierre
http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org