On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi, > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <i...@tyrael.hu> wrote: > > > So currently we didn't talk about security measures, but performance > gains: > > If somebody wants to write a script, which handles big file uploads, but > > only writes it to somewhere (to file, or another stream), then currently > you > > have to allocate the memory for the post data twice(see the first email), > > which is very inefficient if you don't need the $_POST at all. > > yes, but that's something very confusing right now, the naming and the > other ways to access POST data. The goal of this idea is a good thing > to do, but the naming and its implementation are confusing (processing > vs reading vs used at all). > > agree, but it's not helping, if we introduce another similar idea for a whole different purpose to the conversation. :) the best would be a nice and clean RFC with the current status, the known problems, the suggested solutions, and a common and well-understood consistent naming convention. (disable POST processing, disable POST population, etc.) Tyrael
