> >accept_globals("GPC", 'user', 'password', 'value_*', 'more');
> I think that this is a clear example of "the enemy of good is
> the even better" (I'm not sure how well this translates to
> English :).
Good enough to get your point :-)
> behavior only prefixed, use import_globals("GPC", "
At 01:07 30/07/2001, Marc Boeren wrote:
>Hi,
>
> > force a prefix onto the variable name. I.e.,
> > import_globals("GPC", "form_");
>
>I like this idea (the whole idea of import_globals is good, I think, but I'd
>rather call it accept_globals, but more on that later :), only this would
>make it
UNSUBSCRIBE ME PLEASE!!
"Jeffrey A.Stuart" schrieb:
I like this proposal a LOT! See, what I and
a few of my friends have recently
been doing is starting to teach PHP to website owners. And they
have all been
taking to it VERY WELL!!! (Actually Rasmus, you may remember
this. You we
Hi,
> force a prefix onto the variable name. I.e.,
> import_globals("GPC", "form_");
I like this idea (the whole idea of import_globals is good, I think, but I'd
rather call it accept_globals, but more on that later :), only this would
make it difficult to actually differentiate between get, p
Note again that we should not see this change for what it isn't - it *is*
going to be a painful move for those who actually do it. The reason for
this is that register_globals=on silently encouraged writing of faulty
code. In turn, this means that people would have to go over their code in
o
