Re: Re: cvs: php4 /ext/standard filters.c
| From: | Wez Furlong | Date: | Tue, 07 Jan 2003 21:46:42 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: cvs: php4 /ext/standard filters.c | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-93240@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
With the current model, the concept is that you can use either the
filter name or filter parameters to distinguish the ultimate behaviour.
Yes this is a possible headache.
I am thinking that two separate chains of filters (one for reading and
one for writing) might make this situation a little easier;
this way you could have a filtered read stream but leave writing
unfiltered etc.
--Wez.
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:12:15PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > Speaking of filter "string.base64" I have an issue with its parity.
> >
> > string.base64 will encode on write and decode on read... What if the user
> > wants the other way round? Is the expected behavior even obvious from the
> > name alone? Should there be two separate filters? string.base64-encode &
> > string.base64-decode with each doing the same opperation on either read or
> > write?
>
> Agreed. I hit the same problem you mentioned while implementing iconv
> encoding conversion filter. I should have made the filters capable of
> working in the opposite way.
>
> But would it rather be preferred to switch the filter function by
> parameters given to the factory, than to have two similar filters?
>
> Then the problem is there's no unified way to handle those parameters.
> Actually it will do for me to make my own handler, but I see it will
> definitely end up in great inconsistency.
>
> Moriyoshi
>
> --
> PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
>