I would like to see $_REQUEST be just GET | POST
That's what ini-recommended is configured for.
I also see no reason to not keep $_GET if 'G' is missing from GPC
ordering, so that would be a fine second choice.
That changes semantics of existing switch, so I don't feel comfortable
to do suc
On Wed, February 6, 2008 6:39 pm, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a
> conclusion,
> so I will raise it again.
> The Problem:
> We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often used to abstract
> GET/POST
> requests. However, in most cases we do no
On Feb 13, 2008, at 1:50 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Yes, that's why php.ini-recommended should have GP. However,
php.ini-dist documents *the default* - which should be GPC, like
it is right now.
The default is NULL, which means using variables_order - just as
before. I don't see a lo
Yes, that's why php.ini-recommended should have GP. However,
php.ini-dist documents *the default* - which should be GPC, like it is
right now.
The default is NULL, which means using variables_order - just as before.
I don't see a lot of reason to change it to GPC - it would be neither
old c
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > Yes... I didn't seem to see a default:
> >
> > + STD_PHP_INI_ENTRY("request_order", NULL,
> > PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR,OnUpdateString, request_order,
> > php_core_globals, core_globals)
> >
> > Which means
Yes... I didn't seem to see a default:
+ STD_PHP_INI_ENTRY("request_order", NULL,
PHP_INI_SYSTEM|PHP_INI_PERDIR,OnUpdateString, request_order, php_core_globals,
core_globals)
Which means that without this setting, nothing ends up in request.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > matching GET/POST. I think this should be cleaned up so that _REQUEST
> > behavior would conform its use case.
>
> Attached is the patch that implements request_order .ini value. Comments?
Yes... I didn't seem to see a default:
+ STD_PHP
matching GET/POST. I think this should be cleaned up so that _REQUEST
behavior would conform its use case.
Attached is the patch that implements request_order .ini value. Comments?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAI
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> So, what do you think on this?
Don't care so much about it, as long as the defaults keep the same like
they are now.
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 02:17 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 01:43 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> >> Jani Taskinen wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > The proposal(s):
> > 1.
Am 07.02.2008 um 11:02 schrieb Jani Taskinen:
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 01:43 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Well, plenty of people know about this feature and make use of it.
Especially since it has been documented to work this way for a long
time.
See: http://php.net/manual/en/ini.core.php#ini.
A minor clarification: The auto-globals are always there, they're not
always _populated_ though. (JIC someone misunderstood this part :)
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 02:17 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
[clip]
> directives. We should focus on the actual problem and make the fewest
> changes possible to so
Jani Taskinen wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 01:43 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> Jani Taskinen wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> The proposal(s):
> 1. One way to fix it is to create a new .ini request_order that would
>>>
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 01:43 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> >> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> >>> The proposal(s):
> >>> 1. One way to fix it is to create a new .ini request_order that would
> >>> control just _REQUEST
Jani Taskinen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a conclusion,
>>> so I will raise it again.
>>> The Problem:
>>> We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often use
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a conclusion,
> > so I will raise it again.
> > The Problem:
> > We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often used to abstract GET/POST
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:27 -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a conclusion,
> > so I will raise it again.
> > The Problem:
> > We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often used to abstract GET/POST
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a conclusion,
> so I will raise it again.
> The Problem:
> We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often used to abstract GET/POST
> requests. However, in most cases we do not want GET/POST variables t
Sam Barrow wrote:
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 16:39 -0800, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
[snip]
The proposal(s):
1. One way to fix it is to create a new .ini request_order that would
control just _REQUEST.
2. Other solution would be to keep variables_order but drop 'C' parsing
from _REQUEST - i.e. ma
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 16:39 -0800, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This topic was already discussed here but never arrived to a conclusion,
> so I will raise it again.
> The Problem:
> We have $_REQUEST superglobal, which is often used to abstract GET/POST
> requests. However, in most cases
20 matches
Mail list logo
