Re: Re: [RFC] is_literal

From: Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 10:45:10 +0000
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] is_literal
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-114945@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:10 PM Pierre <pierre-php@processus.org> wrote:

> Le 18/06/2021 à 08:00, Craig Francis a écrit :
> > As there’s been no issues raised with supporting integers, and doing so
> > will help adoption, the implementation will be updated to allow them.
> >
> > Now to choose the name, with the options is_known() from Joe and
> > is_trusted() from Moritz:
> >
> > https://strawpoll.com/bd2qed2xs
> >
> > Keep in mind it might also become a dedicated type in the future.
> >
> > Craig
>
> If I'm understanding this correctly, what you call a literal value is a
> statically written and compiled string, which doesn't originate from a
> user given value, but was hardcoded at some point. If so, even if the
> primary use is of course for security concerns, the realty of what it
> does is not, it's mostly about how a certain variable was defined /
> assigned. How about is_static() or is_value_static() ? Or even
> is_statically_defined() ? There's many options in this path.
>

IIUC, with the addition of integers, the function will return true for e.g.
'SELECT * FROM foo LIMIT ' . (int)$limit even if $limit doesn't come
from
a "static" value (e.g. random_int() or even $_GET['limit'])

-- 
Guilliam Xavier


Thread (69 messages)

« previous php.internals (#114945) next »