Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54728
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH7xRmE2Uc2smRtBiRyyxzvhBWux7E8naAV_0+y-9dv6Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKxcST-n_aC1NJ8pLg5natwRRcxEHV_t-fiEhYX4mc=G7WPFaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E4E48F6.8010107@php.net>
	<CAEZPtU5uRFO+mhQTJDZm32_Y7k6p9HzZmn1YiRmW4iZQrmht9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKxcST9AYTb+SJJydb0u5RK+XgP7og8KqH+1u-7trDrSJBPOKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH56zYkJH8BaGHdKTUmBm6V+k_yxKfAVp9XuES_B5ps5CQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+p1TcZ-_X7x7VdkhjeY86vC67PNmoZ93BcwuJ2uKdWJzhvFLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH7xRmE2Uc2smRtBiRyyxzvhBWux7E8naAV_0+y-9dv6Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 13:47:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+p1TcZVZOg+tyzPo-20xyxcxm0W+ET1aJ-+14V=Ff6AVmEFHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Dragoonis <dragoonis@gmail.com>, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, 
	Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@php.net>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Activation of IGBinary serialization extension in 5.4
 by default
From: arraypad@gmail.com (Arpad Ray)

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Arpad Ray <arraypad@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> the downside would be that if you want to serialize/unserialize the
>>> data outside of php, your implementation should take care of this
>>> prefix.
>>> just a wild idea, but maybe useful:
>>> instead of creating a prefix, we could serialize the passed data with
>>> the given(php, igbinary, etc.) handler, then wrap the whole stuff into
>>> an array which holds the name of the used handler and the serialized
>>> data, and serialize this array with the old(php) serialize method.
>>> this way the datablob would be always a valid serialized string, and
>>> would be easier to get the serialize method than with the prefixing.
>>
>> If my old app couldn't read some newly serialized string, I'd rather
>> it failed hard than apparently succeed but have the wrong data.
>>
>
> http://php.net/unserialize
> In case the passed string is not unserializeable, FALSE is returned
> and E_NOTICE is issued.
> so if you unserialize from php, my suggestion would fail harder.
> when you unserialize it from another mean (parsing it on your own, or
> from a different language), you are right, it would produce a valid
> but different result what you would expect, but this could be
> documented, and I don't think that that many users do this, and maybe
> they are using json/bson/igbinary already.

I'm talking about unserialize() in an old (well, current) version of
PHP - if it unserializes what is apparently a valid array there would
be nothing to indicate it's actually a new version which it can't
read.

Regards,

Arpad