3 ms·

> There are countless other parameters that change the behavior of the language. I call bologna. If you stick to built-in methods and avoid extensions, really

by donatj 5y ago

> There are countless other parameters that change the behavior of the language. I call bologna. If you stick to built-in methods and avoid extensions, really the most breaking thing someone is going to do is turn off `allow_url_fopen` off, and you can either work around that or just complain to the user that you need it and `exit(1)`. > If you’re deploying code that has to run on someone else’s computer without supervision, it shouldn’t be a shell script at all, this is why we have compiled languages. This is the most frustrating comment in this thread, imho. The _ideal_ is all code being distributed as readable source. Binaries are at best a sad compromise in the name of performance. Why would you _desire_ the code you run to be an impenitible black box? I'd far rather run a script I can see what I'm actually doing to my machine instead of a binary.

ironmagma 5y ago
> the most breaking thing someone is going to do is turn `allow_url_fopen` off See [1]. "If PHP was compiled with --disable-url-fopen-wrapper, it won’t work." ... "But it will be printed if scream.enabled is set in php.ini." ... "exactly where it goes depends on display_errors, again in php.ini." There's so much variability in what an arbitrary PHP interpreter might or might not have support for, especially from 10 years ago. > I'd far rather run a script I can see what I'm actually doing to my machine instead of a binary. Then why not ship the source, along with an interpreter binary to run it in isolation? This is one of Lua's main use cases. > Binaries are at best a sad compromise in the name of performance. I disagree with this at a fundamental level because of the fact that binaries are what can be used by a computer. Anything that runs, is ultimately a binary, even if parts of that binary are generated dynamically. By adding a dependency of the environment (system PHP), it adds a layer of magic and unknowns. [1] https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/

by donatj 5y ago

ironmagma 5y ago

> the most breaking thing someone is going to do is turn `allow_url_fopen` off See [1]. "If PHP was compiled with --disable-url-fopen-wrapper, it won’t work." ... "But it will be printed if scream.enabled is set in php.ini." ... "exactly where it goes depends on display_errors, again in php.ini." There's so much variability in what an arbitrary PHP interpreter might or might not have support for, especially from 10 years ago. > I'd far rather run a script I can see what I'm actually doing to my machine instead of a binary. Then why not ship the source, along with an interpreter binary to run it in isolation? This is one of Lua's main use cases. > Binaries are at best a sad compromise in the name of performance. I disagree with this at a fundamental level because of the fact that binaries are what can be used by a computer. Anything that runs, is ultimately a binary, even if parts of that binary are generated dynamically. By adding a dependency of the environment (system PHP), it adds a layer of magic and unknowns. [1] https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ https://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/