Re: RFC [Discussion]: Improve unserialize() error handling

Hi On 9/28/22 17:42, Tim Düsterhus wrote:

If you want to go that route, I'd go all the way to an RCV vote and be done with it. Or else just make an executive decision as the RFC author and let the chips fall where they may.

I'm generally not too happy with secondary votes. Sometimes you only support the primary vote for certain secondary options; to "be sure" that another secondary option won't "win", you'd need to vote "no" on the primary choice. I'd prefer a single vote with pre-selected details. I don't have any particular preference in this case, though.

Would the increase of E_NOTICE to E_WARNING for the two cases that currently emit E_NOTICE be something that even requires a vote or is this something that can simply be decided by merging a PR? [1] In that case the second and third vote could be simplified to "Convert E_* to Exception" with the regular 2/3 majority required.

As I've been told that the E_NOTICE to E_WARNING also requires a vote, I've thought about this whole matter a little more, because I agree with Christoph that secondary votes are "not great". In the end I've decided to make this all primary votes that more or less build on each other, each requiring a 2/3 majority. The vote to change E_NOTICE/E_WARNING to Exception in 8.3 was dropped to keep thing simpler and to not have conflicting votes. Instead there is only "Unify to E_WARNING in 8.x" and "Upgrade to Exception in 9.0" (which may happen independently of whether the E_NOTICE will remain in 8.x). That said: Discussion has come to a halt and I don't plan any more changes to the proposal. As such I plan to open voting on Friday with the voting widgets as they are currently within the RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_unserialize_error_handling#proposed_voting_choices Best regards Tim Düsterhus