Re: [RFC] Display Function Arguments in Errors

On Mar 31, 2026, at 6:53 AM, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2026, Calvin Buckley wrote: > >> Based on the feedback I had from my proposal for function arguments in >> errors last week, I'd like to introduce an RFC for it. Please let me >> know what you think and please raise any possible issues. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/display_error_function_args > > | Add a error_ignore_args, which potentially defaults to “0”. This is > | made an INI option, as some users may want to disable the feature by > | enabling this option, at least for production (e.g. risks of untagged > | PII in logs, size of logs, format compatibility with older versions of > | PHP). > > I'm generally not in favour of new ini settings. I also don't think this > is going to help a lot, as many people will likely not change the > default. > > But, I am especially not keen on "negative names". Names that include > "ignore" or "disable" for example. If you must have an ini setting, it > ought to be something like "include_error_args" (defaulting to "0", I > suspect). > > The confusion in > > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/12276#pullrequestreview-4035216287 > > also explains why I feel this. > > cheers, > Derick > > -- > https://derickrethans.nl | > https://xdebug.org | https://dram.io > > Author of Xdebug. Like it? Consider supporting me: > https://xdebug.org/support > > mastodon: @derickr@phpc.social @xdebug@phpc.social Tim, would this name be OK? I also have a preference towards a non-inverted name (it was more overhead to keep track of it), but I do see wanting it consistent.