Re: [VOTE] Multbye char handling - Remove vulnerability related tomultibyte short and long term

Hi Joe, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org> wrote: > I voted no, on both. > > The first rfc doesn't even contain a patch, so I have nothing to review, I > don't much care what you think the reasons are for the change, I care what > the code says, and there isn't any. > > The second RFC is based on an extension that was written 5 years ago and > hasn't been touched since. > > Not good enough, nothing like good enough ... > Thank you for the comment. It helps :) It would be nice to have patch, I agree. I don't have luxury to write code that would not be used... I don't mind to have vote for proposed patch and improve, though. Is a patch must have requirement for RFC? I think it worth to agree what we should have, then decide/write code like timing safe string comparison. I wouldn't write number of timing safe functions to compare their performance unless it was decided to include. https://github.com/yohgaki/php-src/compare/PHP-5.6-rfc-hash-compare I hope you change your mind. Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net