Re: Deprecating uniqid()

On 5 May 2020 09:42:19 BST, Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godjuks@gmail.com> wrote: >So in my opinion, a better replacement for uniqid is needed - have it >generate a bigger string with more entropy and better underline algorithm, >but it being time-based should be a thing stiff. And do not call it a >"random_string" or something, cause it's not that :) A question just got posted on Stack Overflow asking for pretty much exactly what we've been discussing: https://stackoverflow.com/q/61634022/157957 You're right that the requirements for "random" and "unique" are distinct. Perhaps what we need is a unique_string function that allows you to specify the format (length and some control over allowed characters) and uses a mix of randomness and time (perhaps using the same time source as hrtime()?). Then uniqid() could be deprecated, and anyone relying on its exact format could write a polyfill, while people wanting other formats wouldn't need to mess around with binhex, hexdec, etc. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]