Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63886 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 24857 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2012 20:08:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Nov 2012 20:08:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=wfitch@meetme.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=wfitch@meetme.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain meetme.com designates 74.125.149.69 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: wfitch@meetme.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.149.69 na3sys009aog102.obsmtp.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [74.125.149.69] ([74.125.149.69:33354] helo=na3sys009aog102.obsmtp.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9C/76-07334-BBB45A05 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:08:28 -0500 Received: from mail-vc0-f200.google.com ([209.85.220.200]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob102.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUKVLuQZGGMDRk38QM9lyqqoAonsw9GEZ@postini.com; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:08:27 PST Received: by mail-vc0-f200.google.com with SMTP id fl15so3156865vcb.11 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:08:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=97GncZazQ2pDdB1+SbV44CRt9VborDZjqIGSZ7fOX30=; b=eZwrT+ojBgdO9N5ZTHJQASstJQkJ6Y7XAwYf9sHqC6LaAoBJVIK12RRVgtS5pjPF1L K2xvcnkyx/aLo8yrh6pzLA0ReKgudc+HTsIXD11ybnf5yiPYIGRVTQ+xx11ISniLr3I+ Zf3csSCG5dd86TvymZ4ws+b2FOTP4prCp+lOiMppppSFbma4y5lKm+gmFdV7Pi31uQkH aY9uBuBIfOndhHFxIkxs9nf3+Hu8pxzLEEcSK/YzsPL+uTyvizTHO/tB53ywzbQs0OO1 LzP5wucBdBN7pJsepMc7xNR5WZACZ238JqqDRBSfuRGpqMzY6XyIdtb7omSWBROOZeru Am0w== Received: by 10.58.252.72 with SMTP id zq8mr731302vec.20.1353010104423; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:08:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.252.72 with SMTP id zq8mr731290vec.20.1353010104303; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:08:24 -0800 (PST) Sender: wfitch@meetme.com Received: by 10.58.12.228 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:08:24 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [68.64.144.221] In-Reply-To: <50A549EB.2020408@lerdorf.com> References: <50A10A9D.9070402@oracle.com> <50A1946F.8010407@lerdorf.com> <50A20CCB.8090909@lsces.co.uk> <8A8A29F9E43E417FB5450D63019B2DDB@NeiRoze> <8f4231fc-6e3c-4a33-af71-2af5e7a95dfd@email.android.com> <50A2D672.7010600@gmail.com> <50A30144.5070305@phpgangsta.de> <50A3BEC0.8030607@gmail.com> <50A54713.8090102@sugarcrm.com> <50A549EB.2020408@lerdorf.com> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:08:24 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: yDo48U12uAZwMWzWUWWssheHz8o Message-ID: To: Rasmus Lerdorf Cc: Stas Malyshev , Adam Harvey , Devis Lucato , PHP Developers Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6daa70a5027404ce8e36fc X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnSaoMXCOgPJSJgo1vljPWfW+CpDsnpWtXf41oS6aR7brLSqh9CuAghkm7D8ptud7s4Ak2cpxovbZNm14k7UoVJmCc6BQoC6msoADzK0Hfgw5DjMWU2AgCyWo8hAELUJVw8vBljmkEqavICWc4DofYK6N0Ig0wUAA1FSFlFvXtTFfymod8= Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: ext/mysql deprecation From: willfitch@php.net (Will Fitch) --047d7b6daa70a5027404ce8e36fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 11/15/2012 11:53 AM, Will Fitch wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Stas Malyshev >wrote: > > > >> Hi! > >> > >>> Again, though, this is a long way down the road: today's discussion is > >>> purely about deprecation. > >> > >> So these people using mysql-based code will have for years to live with > >> applications generating thousands of warnings and not be able to do a > > > > thing about it? How is it good for them? > >> > > > > I don't mean to state the obvious, but wouldn't display_errors = 'Off' in > > production or error_reporting = E_ALL ^ E_DEPRECATED be sufficient? This > > is the same approach taken with register_globals - and it happened > between > > 5.3 and 5.4. > > Actually, no it wouldn't. You still get the overhead of the error, plus > any custom error handlers will be triggered regardless of the > error_reporting setting which depending on the implementation of the > error handler can be quite costly performance-wise. > So what solution is there to this? Should it not be deprecated? This same issue (is still happening) with register_globals for us, but it's acceptable as it has been phased out. Should there be no deprecation warning now and wait for a future release? > > -Rasmus > > --047d7b6daa70a5027404ce8e36fc--