# BC break in 5.4, extending internal class - Thread: https://externals.io/message/55916 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/55916 - Started by Pierre Joye on 2011-10-24T13:53:07+00:00 - Messages: 4 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #55916 — Pierre Joye — 2011-10-24T13:53:07+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/55916#55916 hi, Referring to: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55300 and in some extend to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55175 I tend to think that it could have a very bad impact on existing and will prevent many users to migrate easily to 5.4, or smoothly. I think we have to figure a fix for this problem while making it 100% BC with 5.3. I'd to discuss this problem before we go with the 1st RC. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org --- ## #55918 — Paul Dragoonis — 2011-10-24T14:06:31+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/55916#55918 · In reply to: #55916 > hi, > > Referring to: > > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55300 > and in some extend to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55175 > > I tend to think that it could have a very bad impact on existing and > will prevent many users to migrate easily to 5.4, or smoothly. I think > we have to figure a fix for this problem while making it 100% BC with > 5.3. I'd to discuss this problem before we go with the 1st RC. Pierre, Is it too much deviation to auto-call the DirectoryIterator constructor if the dev made a __construct() in the child class but didn't call the parent construct(), ONLY when the DirectoryIterator's functionality is referenced. Aka a lazy-load check. It's a silent call, and i'm not in favour of silent stuff but maybe this has sparked a few ideas for people reading this discussion to come up with a less magic solution. Regards, Paul Dragoonis. > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org --- ## #55919 — Gustavo Lopes — 2011-10-24T14:13:21+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/55916#55919 · In reply to: #55916 Em Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:53:07 +0100, Pierre Joye escreveu: > https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55300 > and in some extend to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55175 > > I tend to think that it could have a very bad impact on existing and > will prevent many users to migrate easily to 5.4, or smoothly. I think > we have to figure a fix for this problem while making it 100% BC with > 5.3. I'd to discuss this problem before we go with the 1st RC. > (context: this is the problem of calling internal methods on objects that were not properly constructed). The change I did in 5.4 should be reverted and synced with 5.3 in the short term because it doesn't work reliably (even not considering the BC break) -- there are other methods for getting an invalid instance (the new reflection method and unserialize, at least). But even in 5.3, there are in SPL counter-measures that don't work reliably, like making a check in get_method. Last month, Etienne was exploring the possibilities for this problem, but I don't think he got to any good solution. In the medium term, either direct calls to zend_object_store_get_object are banned and every method goes through a class-specific wrapper or we come up with a better solution (the only think I came up with in the discussion last time was enforcing the restriction on zend_do_fcall_common_helper/zend_call_function by calling a validation callback stored in the class_entry every time an internal method is to be called). -- Gustavo Lopes --- ## #55938 — Pierre Joye — 2011-10-24T20:27:31+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/55916#55938 · In reply to: #55919 hi, > The change I did in 5.4 should be reverted and synced with 5.3 in the > short term because it doesn't work reliably (even not considering the BC > break) -- there are other methods for getting an invalid instance (the new > reflection method and unserialize, at least). Please do the revert, as you did the commit in the 1st place. As far as I remember we have discussed this issue back then already as well. > But even in 5.3, there are in SPL counter-measures that don't work > reliably, like making a check in get_method. Right, but that's another concern and the same cautiousness should be taken there. Thanks! -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org