On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 05:35, Chris Shiflett wrote: > Right. I was just wondering if there was a reason why the $_POST array > wasn't originally created like Sterling suggested for $_FILES and > $_REQUEST in his solution 1: > > $_FILES['toto']['c']['type'] and $_REQUEST['toto']['c']['type'] > > Meaning, I'm not clear why $_FILES is necessary, since the same approach > can be taken for files in the $_POST array, mixing them with other types > just like $_REQUEST does (the suggested way above, anyway). > > Also, solution 2 mentioned was this: > > > $_REQUEST['toto']['c']['type'] > > > > and > > > > $_FILES['toto']['type']['c'] > > > > which is ugly and just not right, but it maintains backwards > > compatibility with the $_FILES array. > > Is the thought here that no one will be depending on the weird format of > the $_REQUEST array as mentioned in the bug report? If we're worried > about BC, I don't see why we should favor one group of people (those > using $_FILES) over another (those using $_REQUEST), unless I'm missing > something ... >
Simply because you really couldn't use $_REQUEST to access the files array in the past, at least not without risking some dangerous things/messed up results. The idea is while we can't normalize the source, we _must_ normalize it when it seeps into other parts of php. -Sterling > Chris > > Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > >Because there is more data associated with a file upload than just a > >single piece. > > > >On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Chris Shiflett wrote: > > > > > >>Out of curiosity, why are files treated differently than all other form > >>variables submitted via POST? > >> > >>We don't have $_TEXT, $_RADIO, etc. > >> > >>Maybe there is a good reason, but it seems counter-intuitive to me. > >> > >>Chris > >> -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
