Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85060 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 38900 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2015 14:33:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Mar 2015 14:33:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=tpunt@hotmail.co.uk; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=tpunt@hotmail.co.uk; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain hotmail.co.uk designates 157.55.0.203 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: tpunt@hotmail.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 157.55.0.203 dub004-omc1s4.hotmail.com Received: from [157.55.0.203] ([157.55.0.203:58032] helo=DUB004-OMC1S4.hotmail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 5B/B0-34940-1B9E6055 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:33:22 -0500 Received: from DUB113-W138 ([157.55.0.237]) by DUB004-OMC1S4.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 07:33:18 -0700 X-TMN: [jLV8l/KbQRPDQzYuPzaJnH37Z8QzbybN] X-Originating-Email: [tpunt@hotmail.co.uk] Message-ID: To: David Muir , Lester Caine CC: "internals@lists.php.net" Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:33:18 +0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: <55033D61.8050405@lsces.co.uk>, Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Mar 2015 14:33:18.0444 (UTC) FILETIME=[25330AC0:01D05FF6] Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] STH and the 3 RFCs From: tpunt@hotmail.co.uk (Thomas Punt) Hey David=2C=0A= > A library written in weak or strict mode will have no bearing on its publ= ic API.=0A= =0A= Strictly speaking (pun intended)=2C this is not true. A library can easily = expose a=0A= facade that enforces a user of that library (who is in weak mode) to have t= o write=0A= in strict mode [1]. Once more=2C this can be done unintentionally [2] becau= se of the=0A= caller-deciding semantics. These examples can be further extended into wrap= per=0A= classes=2C nested library dependencies=2C etc.=0A= =0A= Sure=2C you could argue that this could easily be turned off by simply remo= ving the=0A= top declare() statement of that library=2C but modifying the library in its= elf introduces=0A= complications - especially when using dependency managers like Composer.=0A= =0A= [1] https://gist.github.com/tpunt/4830d18d47e2df021c2f=0A= [2] https://gist.github.com/tpunt/eecfed2495bdccb73632=0A= =0A= -Tom =