Re: Proposal to deprecate create_function()

On 17/10/2013 16:47, Pierre Joye wrote:

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, I agree that there is no trvial solution which is 100% feature (and bug) compatible with create_function(). However, I think the more important question is whether there are any particular *use cases* which can't be easily migrated to a different mechanism.

That's the actual question, why should they?

My gut feel is that at least 95% of uses of create_function are to create dynamic callbacks for usort, preg_replace_callback, array_filter, etc. For these uses, the implementation as an eval() is a liability, and reimplementing with real closures is trivial (assuming no need to run on <=5.2).

Yes, as many other new features allow cleaner codes. However I do not see this case as good enough to add more deprecated notices to perfectly valid codes.

I guess to me it seems much the same as deprecating the /e modifier in preg_replace: code using it right now largely works, but it presents a security risk that many users probably don't appreciate. I wasn't subscribed when that was being discussed, so if there are points from that discussion which would be pertinent here, I'd welcome links/summaries. The only real difference I can see with create_function is that it is/was more widely used; is that your concern, or do you see a fundamental difference between the two situations? -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]