At 20:52 14/08/2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
Zeev Suraski wrote: > If we are to do anything about register_globals, perhaps we can change > the name of the directive to something else (e.g. unprotected_globals), > and of course keep its default 0. Admins will have to make an informed > decision to turn it on again, and we can speak against it as strongly as > we want in an upgrade guide.I think that would be a really bad idea. Code that tries to be portable and uses ini_get('register_globals') would now be lying to us? Or do we add unprotected_globals as an alias? So instead of getting rid of it, we now have two directives that mean the same thing?
While that can easily be solved (making register_globals a read only alias of unprotected_globals), I'm not sold on this idea, although it does the same job as userland solution.
Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
