Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72380
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALwr1Gm+d+y_qyZ45RTBk+BuOSvTqixXKAh3UxKiG_pHhonVDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEZPtU7NJYRrsMMnNZZZ2fi_XSvqG5J=85=kd9yO5c54zfDCSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALwr1Gm+d+y_qyZ45RTBk+BuOSvTqixXKAh3UxKiG_pHhonVDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:55:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU5wXNsQHt7CPzeFdeAz=6xe_57CByGXJEN61-WcoDHhdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draic_Brady?= <padraic.brady@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] unify entropy source for all php related functions
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:53 PM, P=C3=A1draic Brady <padraic.brady@gmail.co=
m> wrote:

> In principle, that makes a lot of sense. It beats wondering what each
> different function is using under the covers and may even simplify
> userland code a bit (and reduce some file checking if it can be relied
> upon).

Yes, both effects are part of the idea. It is useful in userland as
well as one can simply fopen one of them without worrying about it.

>> I am not willing to propose new RNG functions or extensions for 5.6 as
>> we have way too little time to actually discuss its design and APIs.
>> However having these settings unified and documented would be a good
>> step forward already.
>
> I think the end goal should be unification with some generalised API.
> At the moment we have mt_rand(), lcg_value(),
> openssl_random_pseudo_bytes(), mcrypt_create_iv() and then the file
> read approaches. They all have uses, but they sit in different places
> and extensions and it=E2=80=99s not always clear what each is best at. I =
agree
> that this would take a lot of time to work through.

Yes, something we can think about targeting 6 and cleanup all this mess :)

Cheers,
--=20
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org