Re: [RFC][VOTE] Add validation functions to filter module
| From: | Lars Strojny | Date: | Thu, 01 Sep 2016 11:59:24 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC][VOTE] Add validation functions to filter module | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-95532@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi Yasuo,
> On 31 Aug 2016, at 21:45, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
[...]
> Thank you for voting!
> The RFC is declined 1 vs 13
> A bit surprised this result.
>
> I requested the reason of objection, but many of them does not disclose why.
[...]
> lstrojny (lstrojny)
[...]
sorry for not chiming in earlier, but I indeed owe you an explanation. I believe making ext/filter a
part of PHP created more trouble than it solved, even though I applaud it’s intention. Of course,
filtering and validation are necessary essentials of any secure web application. I nevertheless
strongly believe validation and filtering must live in userland.
Validation and filtering are often very much tied to the domain problem a user of PHP is to solving
and the change rate of the application will be higher than the change rate of the language
(hopefully). To give a more concrete example: let’s say our problem is we want to validate if a
string is a valid domain because our business is registering domains. Nowadays, top level domains
are introduced quite often and there is no way PHP could have a nice, up to date whitelist of TLDs
all of the time and as a domain registration business it’s impossible for me to wait for the
updated whitelist in PHP NEXT. That’s why I believe this is something that belongs to userland so
the library that offers (domain) validation can follow a lifecycle that fits the problem it is
trying to solve.
cu,
Lars
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail signature.asc
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail signature.asc