Re: [RFC] [VOTE] Improve openssl_random_pseudo_bytes()

@Niklas: Ooops! Thanks for pointing that out. Done! :) https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/3649 @Nikita > IMHO we should just document that it is guaranteed to always be true if the call succeeds and > checking it is not necessary. But we should not penalize existing code that is checking the flag -- > it may no longer necessary nowadays, but previously that was the correct use of the function. That's fair. I'm just thinking of devs that will encounter the second param outside of the docs (i.e. via their IDE hints). And since ext/openssl seems to be here for the long haul, the goal would be to have a non-confusing API going forward. But I can totally see your point as well which is the main reason I went for two separate votes. :) Thanks, Sammy Kaye Powers sammyk.me