Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94442
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.41 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPwsocE5v7mGt3frjoPeFyt6sWtvkjWb=zcPUhFuRLA8fXLY2g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPwsocEihGOWC5_KX_FFe36dKTdSob0FFJUKuQW+u53QyeqgsQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU7AzLGbFh+=bvJNA+HScLVuKsUuF9iUEhACL6xv7VRZ-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPwsocF0Zty7Kp1FZHYA2h+Y+eJvypj9nt1OPa8fdEZdiqR8vw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU48mLGqVVh4sDguto4Vx9Kj+ec=ViTUWXOr-UXCgSt2KA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU6XUGM4BfQ5g+huV_=rrVPfFtpmSO+3CzTcXPC20+x2=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPwsocE5v7mGt3frjoPeFyt6sWtvkjWb=zcPUhFuRLA8fXLY2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:49:08 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU7e2rvvHtNb3mC3qNT7ZY6djFX3sJ-Wo7rQLDDiRw5Y=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leigh <leight@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149574006c7d505372ffe56
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] RNG fixes
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

--001a1149574006c7d505372ffe56
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Jul 9, 2016 3:19 PM, "Leigh" <leight@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2016 at 08:48 Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, I voted no then as it is clear that you do not see a problem to
>> break codes without a single warning or time to adapt before.
>>
>> The other sections are fine and voted yes.
>
>
> For the part where you voted no. Still nobody has presented (publicly
available) source that makes legitimate use of mt_srand (yes it's mt_srand
that is "broken" here, not mt_rand) for deterministic streams of random
numbers. I can only assume by this that almost nobody does. However, for
those that do, they can still use the old algorithm.

I am sorry but this PR possibly breaks BC and cases have been clearly
explained how and why. Asking to show production  code publically is not
something that you should request.

I can write a sample app to show you how but given the explanations many
gave already....

> For all of the other sections where you voted yes, they are mostly bug
fixes, but all change the output of mt_rand AND more functions (without a
single warning, like you wanted). I'm not trying to encourage you to change
any votes, but I need to make sure you understand what you're voting for.

--001a1149574006c7d505372ffe56--