# Native support - PUT request, multipart form data - Thread: https://externals.io/message/76591 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/76591 - Started by Park Framework on 2014-08-16T22:41:12+00:00 - Messages: 16 - 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 --- ## #76591 — Park Framework — 2014-08-16T22:41:12+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76591 This is necessary for convenient use RESTful API. file_get_contents('php://input') - Very inconvenient I would like to finally get native support for PHP, preferably version 5.6 --- ## #76592 — Park Framework — 2014-08-16T23:47:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76592 Variable $_PUT is already a popular name. Many for yourself already so it was called, at the bottom link. http://stackoverflow.com/search?q=PHP+%24_PUT But I like the name $_DATA - it is universal for any request method. For frontend developers, this name is very clear: $.ajax({ type: "PUT", contentType: "application/json", data: {"name": "value"} }); Except multipart form data, needed and native support for application/json. In many languages (Java, Python, ASP), it has long been there. It is a pity that the PHP in 2014, it has not yet implemented. 2014-08-17 2:14 GMT+03:00 Chris Wright : > > > […] > 5.6 > > The window for getting new features into 5.6 has passed, quite a long time > ago. > > Also, there is no $_PUT superglobal (and personally I do not think > there should be one), and it would not make sense to put this data > into $_POST (or any existing superglobal). Please explain the API you > envisage to get this working. --- ## #76594 — Chris Wright — 2014-08-17T00:10:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76594 · In reply to: #76592 > Variable $_PUT is already a popular name. > Many for yourself already so it was called, at the bottom link. > http://stackoverflow.com/search?q=PHP+%24_PUT > > But I like the name $_DATA - it is universal for any request method. IMO $_BODY would make more sense, $_DATA is very ambiguous. > For frontend developers, this name is very clear: > $.ajax({ > type: "PUT", > contentType: "application/json", > data: {"name": "value"} > }); > > Except multipart form data, needed and native support for application/json. > > In many languages (Java, Python, ASP), it has long been there. > It is a pity that the PHP in 2014, it has not yet implemented. For the record, IMHO what is required here is a *bundled* OO request abstraction extension, which would expose the underlying parser routines in such a way that conversions of the input to a data structure can be done with a single call. but *not* make any assumptions about what is being done in the application. It has never sat well with me that multipart inputs cannot be accessed as a raw string. I haven't actually given any though to what this API would look like though... --- ## #76596 — Andrea Faulds — 2014-08-17T00:25:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76596 · In reply to: #76592 > Variable $_PUT is already a popular name. $_POST isn’t really POST data nor is $_GET really GET data. We shouldn’t continue this silly naming tradition given both existing names are inaccurate. We should have a query parameters array and a request body parameters array or blob. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ --- ## #76597 — Park Framework — 2014-08-17T00:33:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76597 · In reply to: #76596 Maybe, select the best API can community. The main thing that it was not a reason for delaying. 2014-08-17 3:25 GMT+03:00 Andrea Faulds : > > > > > […] > > $_POST isn’t really POST data nor is $_GET really GET data. We shouldn’t > continue this silly naming tradition given both existing names are > inaccurate. > > We should have a query parameters array and a request body parameters > array or blob. > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ --- ## #76598 — Thomas Bley — 2014-08-17T02:09:35+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76598 · In reply to: #76597 I think it would be great to have json encoded data from input body in $_REQUEST, just like parameters from the request-uri or form-urlencoded data. Regards, Thomas Park Framework wrote on 17.08.2014 02:33: > Maybe, select the best API can community. > The main thing that it was not a reason for delaying. > > > 2014-08-17 3:25 GMT+03:00 Andrea Faulds : > > > […] --- ## #76599 — Thomas Bley — 2014-08-17T02:18:22+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76599 · In reply to: #76592 Since we get JSON data, I would also consider $_JSON. Regards Thomas Park Framework wrote on 17.08.2014 01:47: > Variable $_PUT is already a popular name. > Many for yourself already so it was called, at the bottom link. > http://stackoverflow.com/search?q=PHP+%24_PUT > > But I like the name $_DATA - it is universal for any request method. > For frontend developers, this name is very clear: > $.ajax({ > type: "PUT", > contentType: "application/json", > data: {"name": "value"} > }); > > Except multipart form data, needed and native support for application/json. > > In many languages (Java, Python, ASP), it has long been there. > It is a pity that the PHP in 2014, it has not yet implemented. > > > > 2014-08-17 2:14 GMT+03:00 Chris Wright : > > > […] --- ## #76600 — Ferenc Kovacs — 2014-08-17T09:22:15+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76600 · In reply to: #76591 On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Park Framework wrote: > This is necessary for convenient use RESTful API. > > file_get_contents('php://input') - Very inconvenient > > I would like to finally get native support for PHP, preferably version 5.6 > feel free to create an rfc/implementation, I don't think it would be wise to introduce it in 5.6.x(there is zero chance to have this in 5.6.0), but our releaseprocess allows small self-contained features in a micro version, so you can try targetting 5.6.next with the rfc but there is a chance that some people will vote no who otherwise would support this in 5.next or 7.0. I tend to agree that it would be better to move away from the method named superglobals, but ofc. killing off $_GET/$_POST could only happen in a major version. -- Ferenc Kovács @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu --- ## #76605 — David Zuelke — 2014-08-17T10:49:10+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76605 · In reply to: #76599 That does not make any sense; applications could accept XML, CSV or whatever else just as well. The original proposal is not very useful. $_GET contains parsed query string info, $_POST contains parsed HTTP request body information if the media type is application/x-www-urlencoded or multipart/form-data. Deserializing that makes sense as the rules for it are in the HTTP spec. $_PUT/$_BODY/$_DATA would then have to contain the raw body contents, at least if the media type isn't one of the above, for consistency. That'd saves the `file_get_contents()` call, and given how a request handler uses at most once, I'm not sure such a change is worth it. David > Since we get JSON data, I would also consider $_JSON. > > Regards > Thomas > > > Park Framework wrote on 17.08.2014 01:47: > > > […] --- ## #76606 — Julien Pauli — 2014-08-17T11:38:02+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76606 · In reply to: #76605 > That does not make any sense; applications could accept XML, CSV or whatever else just as well. > > The original proposal is not very useful. $_GET contains parsed query string info, $_POST contains parsed HTTP request body information if the media type is application/x-www-urlencoded or multipart/form-data. Deserializing that makes sense as the rules for it are in the HTTP spec. > > $_PUT/$_BODY/$_DATA would then have to contain the raw body contents, at least if the media type isn't one of the above, for consistency. That'd saves the `file_get_contents()` call, and given how a request handler uses at most once, I'm not sure such a change is worth it. I'd say, why not ? The patch should be trivial after all. $_INPUT ? However, I'm not +1 to add this into a revision version. Julien.P --- ## #76607 — Park Framework — 2014-08-17T13:10:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76607 · In reply to: #76600 2014-08-17 12:22 GMT+03:00 Ferenc Kovacs : > > > > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Park Framework > […] > > > […] > > feel free to create an rfc/implementation, I don't think it would be wise > to introduce it in 5.6.x(there is zero chance to have this in 5.6.0), but > our releaseprocess allows small self-contained features in a micro version, > so you can try targetting 5.6.next with the rfc but there is a chance that > some people will vote no who otherwise would support this in 5.next or 7.0. > I tend to agree that it would be better to move away from the method named > superglobals, but ofc. killing off $_GET/$_POST could only happen in a > major version. > > -- > Ferenc Kovács > @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu > I have never written RFC, and I'm not a developer in C/C++. Will correct if the RFC write the author of the patch. Thank you. --- ## #76612 — Park Framework — 2014-08-17T20:14:38+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76612 · In reply to: #76596 As a variant, not to create a new super global variables, can be modified $_REQUEST to OOP style class _REQUEST implements ArrayAccess // for backward compatibility { .... } // get as array, from body request $_REQUEST->body // get all http request headers $_REQUEST->headers // get method request - POST, PUT... $_REQUEST->method // get Content-Type: multipart/form-data or application/json or ... $_REQUEST->type // get Content-Length request $_REQUEST->length It looks nice, but in practice it is more convenient to use an global array - $_DATA or $_BODY or $_INPUT. You can also do: class _INPUT implements ArrayAccess { public function get($name, $default = null) { if(isset($this->data[$name]) { return $this->data[$name]; } else { return $default; } } public function filter($name, $filter = FILTER_DEFAULT, $options = null) { return filter_var($this->data[$name], $filter, $options); } } Examples: $value = $_INPUT->get('varName1', 'myDefaultValue'); $email = $_INPUT->filter('varName2', FILTER_SANITIZE_EMAIL); 2014-08-17 3:25 GMT+03:00 Andrea Faulds : > > > > > […] > > $_POST isn’t really POST data nor is $_GET really GET data. We shouldn’t continue this silly naming tradition given both existing names are inaccurate. > > We should have a query parameters array and a request body parameters array or blob. > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ --- ## #76616 — Chris Wright — 2014-08-17T20:55:54+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76616 · In reply to: #76605 > That does not make any sense; applications could accept XML, CSV or whatever else just as well. > > The original proposal is not very useful. $_GET contains parsed query string info, $_POST contains parsed HTTP request body information if the media type is application/x-www-urlencoded or multipart/form-data. Deserializing that makes sense as the rules for it are in the HTTP spec. (warning: nitpicking) actually, neither of these types are part of the HTTP specification, the protocol specification doesn't deal with how to handle content, only how to transmit it. RFC 2616 makes no mention of it, and RFCs 7230-7235 don't either. > $_PUT/$_BODY/$_DATA would then have to contain the raw body contents, at least if the media type isn't one of the above, for consistency. That'd saves the `file_get_contents()` call, and given how a request handler uses at most once, I'm not sure such a change is worth it. I completely agree that there should be no special processing in the case of any content-type that is not already handled by $_POST, but I don't see the harm in handling those content types for arbitrary methods. Personally my ideal option would be to deprecate $_POST and $_GET in favour of $_BODY and $_QUERY, respectively, which would be populated the same way regardless of the request method (not just PUT and POST). Similarly $_FILES would be populated for any multipart/form-data request entity, regardless of request method. No other content type could be reasonably handled since there is ambiguity in how it would be handled (to take the alternate examples David mentioned, `json_decode()` has options and there are a million and one ways to handle XML). One might suggest having these configurable with ini options or runtime functions, but both of these would largely defeat the purpose of such automatic handling. I agree with Julien that this is not the sort of thing that should go into a point release, and if $_POST/$_GET were to be deprecated then this would be a change for 7, probably with removal not before 8. All that said, I personally don't find the requirement for writing 2 additional lines to parse the data such a huge burden. I'm not against it, but neither will I be particularly upset if it doesn't happen. --- ## #76618 — Park Framework — 2014-08-17T21:44:47+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76618 · In reply to: #76616 2014-08-17 23:55 GMT+03:00 Chris Wright : > Personally my ideal option would be to deprecate $_POST and $_GET in > favour of $_BODY and $_QUERY, respectively, which would be populated > the same way regardless of the request method (not just PUT and POST). > Similarly $_FILES would be populated for any multipart/form-data > request entity, regardless of request method. Ок, then maybe you write the RFC? > I agree with Julien that this is not the sort of thing that should go > into a point release, and if $_POST/$_GET were to be deprecated then > this would be a change for 7, probably with removal not before 8. Native support - PUT method, need today for many developers who would like to find a solution in the near future. --- ## #76642 — David Zuelke — 2014-08-18T10:13:31+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76642 · In reply to: #76616 > > > […] > > (warning: nitpicking) actually, neither of these types are part of the > HTTP specification, the protocol specification doesn't deal with how > to handle content, only how to transmit it. RFC 2616 makes no mention > of it, and RFCs 7230-7235 don't either. Sorry, typo, I meant to write HTML. --- ## #76680 — Larry Garfield — 2014-08-19T03:36:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/76591#76680 · In reply to: #76616 > > > […] > (warning: nitpicking) actually, neither of these types are part of the > HTTP specification, the protocol specification doesn't deal with how > to handle content, only how to transmit it. RFC 2616 makes no mention > of it, and RFCs 7230-7235 don't either. > > > […] > I completely agree that there should be no special processing in the > case of any content-type that is not already handled by $_POST, but I > don't see the harm in handling those content types for arbitrary > methods. > > Personally my ideal option would be to deprecate $_POST and $_GET in > favour of $_BODY and $_QUERY, respectively, which would be populated > the same way regardless of the request method (not just PUT and POST). > Similarly $_FILES would be populated for any multipart/form-data > request entity, regardless of request method. > > No other content type could be reasonably handled since there is > ambiguity in how it would be handled (to take the alternate examples > David mentioned, `json_decode()` has options and there are a million and > one ways to handle XML). One might suggest having these configurable > with ini options or runtime functions, but both of these would largely > defeat the purpose of such automatic handling. > > I agree with Julien that this is not the sort of thing that should go > into a point release, and if $_POST/$_GET were to be deprecated then > this would be a change for 7, probably with removal not before 8. > > All that said, I personally don't find the requirement for writing 2 > additional lines to parse the data such a huge burden. I'm not against > it, but neither will I be particularly upset if it doesn't happen. Related, PHP-FIG is working on a set of common request/response object interfaces. The main hold up right now is stream handling for the body, driven mostly by how developer un-friendly the native PHP stream handling is. Long-term I do believe that PHP should have support for such objects natively and deprecate the super-globals, but that is a non-trivial transition. See also: http://mtdowling.com/blog/2014/07/03/a-case-for-higher-level-php-streams/ And discussion thread here: https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53D4542B.1080408%40garfieldtech.com --Larry Garfield