Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65539
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5109A834.6070503@roojs.com>
References: <op.wq746rv5idpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
	<op.wrmidlpiidpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
	<debcd9bb-79f3-4b2c-aa66-9461018959c9@email.android.com>
	<op.wrmkyvlwidpuyk@damnation.nl.lo.geleia.net>
	<1460659e-237d-4c7c-8cfa-523ec857d646@email.android.com>
	<be26f8067c25e21448eb7f3fc21809b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<51074873.5090600@roojs.com>
	<51076233.2040507@sugarcrm.com>
	<5109A834.6070503@roojs.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:41:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH5JGRuC5XrW++wb_nMUg60CaOL=ccZT8OSOCCNBELPZfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alan Knowles <alan@roojs.com>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04462dd409efd304d4941aa6
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Deprecate and remove calls from incompatible
 context (example of real usage that will break)
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--f46d04462dd409efd304d4941aa6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>
> The fact that this use of PHP is documented in the manual as a feature
> www.php.net/manual/en/**language.oop5.basic.php<http://www.php.net/manual=
/en/language.oop5.basic.php>
>
> And mentions that it will elicit a E_STRICT error - does not indicate tha=
t
> it would be DEPRECATED, I'm assuming that has been documented for years,
> and only recently (a year or two) has the E_STRICT comment been added.
> There is also no real Justification for the E_STRICT message =3D see
> suggestion at end..
>

I stand corrected, I said that (AFAIR) is an undocumented feature, but as
you pointed out, it is documented since (at least) 2004:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/phpdoc/en/trunk/language/oop5/basic.xml?view=3Dma=
rkup&pathrev=3D166424
(there is a typo here, so it is called a psudo variable)
And an example was added in 2005:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=3Drevision&revision=3D178495 by sean (funny
commit comment: 'document seemingly-odd $this behaviour').
The E_STRICTs were added to the examples in 2009:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=3Drevision&revision=3D288217

This doesn't really change my opinion, but it means that there could be
more people using this feature than I/we assumed.
Given the fact that this already spits E_STRICT(and E_STRICT is part of
E_ALL since 5.4) and both E_STRICT and E_DEPRECATED is disable in
our php.ini-production, I would say that changing this from E_STRICT to
E_DEPRECATED has no direct impact to the userland.
But we can use this change to sample the people using this feature and
based on the feedback we can decide whether we want to keep this or remove
it for the next version.
So my opinion is that we should stick to the vote and deprecate this
feature but update the RFC and remove the part removing it in the next
version.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--f46d04462dd409efd304d4941aa6--