Re: Deprecating uniqid()
| From: | Ben Ramsey | Date: | Sat, 02 May 2020 19:13:25 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Deprecating uniqid() | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-109973@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> On May 2, 2020, at 13:57, AllenJB <php.lists@allenjb.me.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to discuss deprecating uniqid()
>
> I believe it's dangerously bad a doing "what it says on the tin". New developers
> still reach for it and do not read the warnings on the manual page (or if they do, don't fully
> understand how bad it is).
>
> For older codebases that still rely on it, a userland replacement can be easily implemented
> (and could be published on Packagist).
>
> I noticed there was an RFC [0][1] brought up 2 years ago, but was never voted on. Does anyone
> know why this was?
>
> [0] https://externals.io/message/102097
> [1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-uniqid
>
> Is there interest in deprecating this function?
>
> If not deprecation, how could it be (further) "improved"? My first thought is to make
> the "more entropy" option enabled by default (the argument could remain so that it can be
> disabled by codebases that rely on the lower length and can take the tradeoffs).
Instead of deprecating and removing it, would anyone be opposed to replacing the internals of the
function so that it uses
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Message signed with OpenPGP signature.asc
random_bytes() under the hood, while all other functionality
remains the same?
Cheers,
Ben
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Message signed with OpenPGP signature.asc