Re: Re: Always set return_value_ptr?

From: Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:49:55 +0000
Subject: Re: Re: Always set return_value_ptr?
References: 1 2 3 4 5  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-68716@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
hi, On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Terry Ellison <ellison.terry@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes I understand that, but the code processes the elements in this dirname, > basename, filename, extension order so the two statements are equivalent in > implementation. > > I am an experienced developer but a newbie-ish to the PHP developer > community, and I come back to my Q. What do we typically do if we come > across such weird functional behaviour outside the documented use of a > standard function? > > * Shrug our shoulders and say "That's PHP for you. BC rules" As of now, this is the rule. BC has a much higher priority than some weird edge cases bug fixes. > * Fix the documentation to say what the code actually does That should be the case as much as possible :) > * Fix the code at the next major release, say 5.6 to have sensible error > behaviour. This is always a gray zone, especially if changes behaviors and then introduces BC issues. BC breaks are the biggest problems in php. Obviously I am not referring to new notices or warnings but actual behaviors changes. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org

« previous php.internals (#68716) next »