Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:96140
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain kelunik.com from 81.169.146.221 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU5pS9pqB0nnVuMaoOu3Gfp_seZDS2XakAsw+3XojDkQQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+kxMuQqKL7=+7NEAT8Nh6cWofJkNkQj7ujm7Ksi2yW_6cH0dQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU6o2eypGrQay-+eOtkU=V_03uJNQpaRr2MVwAGGgbz7-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPwsocHWv5nQDufvTgJK4BkYsLidHxVD3NBAUkNXzOwL00kouA@mail.gmail.com>
 <006d8ac3-df7d-8890-5b60-56fbc9e856b1@gmx.de> <CANUQDCijPyr8KGSOiHMDGANJpwDYbi8F8MrBc1MAUwJL-_berg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEZPtU5pS9pqB0nnVuMaoOu3Gfp_seZDS2XakAsw+3XojDkQQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 23:06:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CANUQDCiPgkTnARcaqWQTarptestHNL=eAuVvNMhgaK=4AgY+hQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>, Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>, Leigh <leight@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11444af4f8b703053d5b61ef
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] get_class() disallow null parameter
From: me@kelunik.com (Niklas Keller)

--001a11444af4f8b703053d5b61ef
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

2016-09-25 20:58 GMT+02:00 Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>:

> On Sep 26, 2016 12:09 AM, "Niklas Keller" <me@kelunik.com> wrote:
> >
> > 2016-09-25 15:19 GMT+02:00 Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>:
> >>
> >> On 25.09.2016 at 11:29, Leigh wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 at 06:29 Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Also this behavior is clearly documented:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://th1.php.net/manual/en/function.get-class.php
> >> >>
> >> >> "If object is omitted when inside a class, the name of that class is
> >> >> returned."
> >> >>
> >> >> I am opposed to break BC because we change our mind about how clean
> is this
> >> >> behavior and I recommend the (future) RMs to veto this change.
> >> >
> >> > This is ambiguous at best.
> >> >
> >> > "Omitted" and "Not omitted but set to null" are different things.
> >>
> >> However, the changelog entry for 5.3.0 states:
> >>
> >> | NULL became the default value for object, so passing NULL to object
> >> | now has the same result as not passing any value.
> >>
> >> And that's what I would expect when reading the function signature;
> >> after all, NULL is the default value of $object.
> >
> >
> > I think what matters is the documentation of the return value, not the
> changelog.
> >
> >> Returns the name of the class of which object is an instance. Returns
> FALSE if object is not an object.
> >>
> >> If object is omitted when inside a class, the name of that class is
> returned.
> >
> >
> > It clearly says "omitted", that's passing nothing at all. Passing `null`
> doesn't omit an argument, it passes `null`.
> >
> >>  I am opposed to break BC because we change our mind about how clean is
> this
> >
> >
> > I guess most code that might pass null is probably broken, do you have a
> use case where the current behavior even makes sense?
>
> Probably is sadly not a fact.
>
> We restore it because it was breaking code. If I remember correctly it was
> due to some other non existent features that allows the same  (or not
> working).
>
> All I am saying is this is a BC break with little to no value because what
> willing to support 7.1+ only can simply use the alternatives.
>
Which alternatives?

--001a11444af4f8b703053d5b61ef--