Re: Re: results of the PHP6 wishlists
| From: | Antony Dovgal | Date: | Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:45:56 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: results of the PHP6 wishlists | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-19997@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 15.11.2005 05:38, Roman Ivanov wrote:
Antony Dovgal wrote:Obviously, no, this won't be the only way to get the data.On 14.11.2005 12:55, Roman Ivanov wrote:I do not think so. If the only way to get 'post' and 'get' variables will be trough input_get(), then filter extension will effectively and functionally replace those arrays. Is it not righ?wishlist> input filter extension (including some element of user wishlist> control) Will it be used _instead_ of $_POST and $_GET?An extension instead of the arrays? You must be missing something...
Recursion does not solve the problem I'm trying to highlight. //Way #1: <skip>Honestly, I'm not so sure it's a good idea to implement it like PECL extension does. Filtering individual variables is, in my opinion, a wrong way to treat user input.You may filter data recursively, so filtering, for example, _POST or _GET would work fine.
//Way #2: <skip>Didn't get the problem, sorry. Could you try to explain it once more?
"Part of the standard API, which is included with PHP and compiles by default", if you will.So, basically you're objecting against enabling it by default? Why? I really do not see a reason to not include it by default, if it helps to write more secure code. (remember that "enabled by default" means you can disable it in a moment).
Right. Feel free to write your own PHP class/library for filtering, if you think that this predefined structure doesn't fit your needs. -- Wbr, Antony DovgalYeah, that's why you can use your own callback for filtering.Callback just plugs your function in some pre-defined structure.