On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Andrei Zmievski <and...@gravitonic.com> wrote: > Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: >> >> As I said earlier, the function is never supposed to be used with >> objects. Therefore, we cannot declare it to be broken, and any change >> to the behavior anyway leads to a huge BC break. I got a report that >> claims the reporter's real-world application behaves strangely with >> the latest release candidate. > > Should we have array_unique_for_non_strings() then or something?
That'd be stupid. What is reasonable is to make it default to SORT_STRING... Or is there any strong reason to make the default SORT_REGULAR now that you can specify SORT_REGULAR to array_unique() throught the second argument? > >> That said, I'm not really against making SORT_REGULAR default for >> later versions than 5.2.x as long as *appropriate notices* are >> provided, while I strongly disagree for 5.2.x. > > What sort of notices do you propose? At runtime or in the docs? You even didn't mention that the behavior would be changed starting with 5.2.9 in the document, instead you simply added the description for the second optional argument that defaults to SORT_REGULAR, as if it was the default long before. That's absolutely the thing we should not do. Eitherway, if we were to make such change, I think we should at least make the second argument mandatory. Moriyoshi > > -Andrei > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
