In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?
- I guess we are not going to deal with "foo.php?a.b.c = 10" in 5.3.0
(should we put something on the 6.0 todo list for this?)
--
troels
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:32 PM, troels knak-nielsen
troelskn@gmail.com wrote:
In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?
Currently, php replaces dots in paramter-names with underscores. This
is a legacy of register_globals.
As register_globals still can be enabled in 5.3, it is better to leave
this replacement for consistency reasons (you can't have $a.b.c
variable).
In 6.0, on the other hand, register_globals is not available. So, it
doesn't make sense to have replacement there too.
5.3 is left with status-quo:
?a.b.c=10 => $a_b_c, $_GET['a_b_c']
6.0 will have:
?a.b.c=10 => $_GET['a.b.c']
- I guess we are not going to deal with "foo.php?a.b.c = 10" in 5.3.0
(should we put something on the 6.0 todo list for this?)
--
Alexey Zakhlestin
http://www.milkfarmsoft.com/
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:32 PM, troels knak-nielsen
troelskn@gmail.com wrote:In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain
what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?Currently, php replaces dots in paramter-names with underscores. This
is a legacy of register_globals.
As register_globals still can be enabled in 5.3, it is better to leave
this replacement for consistency reasons (you can't have $a.b.c
variable).
In 6.0, on the other hand, register_globals is not available. So, it
doesn't make sense to have replacement there too.5.3 is left with status-quo:
?a.b.c=10 => $a_b_c, $_GET['a_b_c']6.0 will have:
?a.b.c=10 => $_GET['a.b.c']
I think there should be a period where both methods of access are
possible, allowing for smoother transition.
Best regards,
Stefan
Am 13.01.2009 um 11:09 schrieb Alexey Zakhlestin:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:32 PM, troels knak-nielsen
troelskn@gmail.com wrote:In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain
what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?Currently, php replaces dots in paramter-names with underscores. This
is a legacy of register_globals.
Sure? "foo|bar", "foo-bar" etc. don't get the same treatment...
Am 13.01.2009 um 11:09 schrieb Alexey Zakhlestin:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:32 PM, troels knak-nielsen
troelskn@gmail.com wrote:In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain
what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?Currently, php replaces dots in paramter-names with underscores. This
is a legacy of register_globals.Sure? "foo|bar", "foo-bar" etc. don't get the same treatment...
Yes, but those are chosen knowing the consequences - for <input
type="image" name="foo" ...>, you get foo.x and foo.y from the
browser, and those aren't accessible via register_globals.
Best regards,
Stefan
Am 13.01.2009 um 11:09 schrieb Alexey Zakhlestin:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:32 PM, troels knak-nielsen
troelskn@gmail.com wrote:In a recent mail, some kind of issue regarding queryparams was
mentioned (Possibly related to namespaces). Could anybody explain what
the issue is, or point to where it's discussed?Currently, php replaces dots in paramter-names with underscores. This
is a legacy of register_globals.Sure? "foo|bar", "foo-bar" etc. don't get the same treatment...
Yes, but those are chosen knowing the consequences - for <input type="image"
name="foo" ...>, you get foo.x and foo.y from the browser, and those aren't
accessible via register_globals.
Sure they are, through foo_x and foo_y.
regards,
Derick
--
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org
twitter: derickrethans
In 6.0, on the other hand, register_globals is not available. So, it
doesn't make sense to have replacement there too.5.3 is left with status-quo:
?a.b.c=10 => $a_b_c, $_GET['a_b_c']6.0 will have:
?a.b.c=10 => $_GET['a.b.c']
What about the extract() and import_request_variables() functions? Will
it still do the replacement? I foresee a lot of stop gap solutions
using those functions to get around register_globals. Not saying it is
right, just curious.
--
Brian Moon
Senior Web Engineer
When you care enough to spend the very least.
http://dealnews.com/