Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:60505
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKOpQSzn49CtV3tTX8=QaKV7ungLyXixxak2pesgWjpDeK6NCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPmfwEnMypV6DFRnRsnCvj+KQk1JG54TX3r1DNHQO3QQ0f+hjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU4B0HpVrD4nzN6Cm+ogpza=qeyyfA1qSoRiyFF-dh6iFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAORXhGLkKPY=GpfESDqiCVUhG4vZG7PmqK-v7780fGmvnQyeNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F847B8A.9010007@sugarcrm.com>
	<733bc8ea59cf6737563a62886e92fcb6.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
	<CAHMUw2Ft49f32di4nyOVWhzi-6Qn7u6yP4La2x_Wn2tZK-CHPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL0xaBFKZySc4y72GS45t3En9g-6_RCzacvR3uf-N4fcaxymEA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOpQSyrL_yVqEoxxpN+sWcQ9H6JjRQncpRnnG4BedjMRxrUqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.wdxjzrzmidpuyk@slws007.slhq.int>
	<CAKOpQSzn49CtV3tTX8=QaKV7ungLyXixxak2pesgWjpDeK6NCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 11:31:55 +0200
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH5bWmVJ035cGSxGhKquy83KSXD-NpHyzW0EQOqWm+8=mA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com>
Cc: Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b10c861e63e7e04bf6ef094
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [off] PHP: a fractal of bad design
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--047d7b10c861e63e7e04bf6ef094
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt
> >wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 07 May 2012 10:31:00 +0200, Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >  That being said, I agree that this *definitely* should be fixed if the
> >>
> >> examples cited are indeed accurate (I've been working with PHP for ove=
r
> >> 10 years and I was never aware of this bizarre behavior, either).  I
> don't
> >> know the history of this, but I at least would consider it to be a bug=
.
> >>  A rather large one, in fact; though I think some of the fears express=
ed
> >> are a bit hyperbolic.  And if you're fixing a serious bug or security
> >> vulnerability, as a general rule of thumb, this automatically superced=
es
> >> any concerns regarding BC breakage IMHO.
> >>
> >
> > This has already been discussed in its own thread, see
> > http://comments.gmane.org/**gmane.comp.php.devel/72790<
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.php.devel/72790>; see also
> > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?**id=3D54547<
> https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=3D54547>
> >
> > Doing away entirely with this behavior (e.g. making " 2" =3D=3D "2" com=
pare
> > false) would be a rather large BC break, that discussion is restricted =
to
> > whether integers in strings should be treated differently from integer
> > literals for comparison purposes when their range is exceeded. I wrote =
a
> > patch for that, and, while not really caring one way or the other, I'm
> not
> > convinced it's necessary and I some have consistency concerns (though
> float
> > overflows already get a similar treatment).
> >
> > --
> > Gustavo Lopes
> >
>
> Agreed.  While it's no secret that I believe optional strong typing would
> be helpful in this context, setting that aside I would definitely not wan=
t
> to see implicit conversions like "2" =3D=3D 2 or even " 2" =3D=3D 2 go aw=
ay (though
> I do wish more PHP devs were familiar with the various trim() functions
> lol).
>
> That being said, this is what had me scratching my head from a previous
> message in this thread:
>
> >$a =3D "123ABF453..."; //a password
> >$b =3D "123DFEABC..."; //another one
> >if ($a =3D=3D $b){
> > //you're in.
> >}
>
>
> The thought that $a =3D=3D $b would actually evaluate to TRUE is utterly
> absurd....  Only catch is, it doesn't.  As I was sharpening my pitchfork
> getting ready to argue why this should be considered a bug and not
> conflated with implicit conversions like " 2" =3D=3D 2, I decided to do a
> little test script against 5.3.11.  I was unable to reproduce the behavio=
r
> being reported in the above example.  In my tests, $a =3D=3D $b returned =
FALSE.
>  As it should.
>
>
juggling won't happen here, because both sides are strings, and they aren't
numerical strings, so that example was bogus indeed.
the discussion here is about whether it is not expected that the numerical
strings will compared as numbers even in they can only represented as
number if some kind of precision loss occurs.
about numerical strings:
http://php.net/manual/en/language.operators.comparison.php
"If you compare a number with a string or the comparison involves numerical
strings, then each string is converted to a
number<http://www.php.net/manual/en/language.types.string.php#language.type=
s.string.conversion>
and
the comparison performed numerically. These rules also apply to the
switch<http://www.php.net/manual/en/control-structures.switch.php>
statement.
The type conversion does not take place when the comparison is =3D=3D=3D or=
 !=3D=3D
as this involves comparing the type as well as the value."


--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--047d7b10c861e63e7e04bf6ef094--