php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login

go to bug id or search bugs for

Request #22660 $_GLOBALS variable
Submitted: 2003-03-12 10:15 UTC Modified: 2003-03-12 17:00 UTC
Votes:2
Avg. Score:4.5 ± 0.5
Reproduced:2 of 2 (100.0%)
Same Version:1 (50.0%)
Same OS:1 (50.0%)
From: pierre dot thierry at moine-fou dot org Assigned:
Status: Wont fix Package: Feature/Change Request
PHP Version: 4.3.1 OS: Debian 3.0r1 GNU/Linux 2.4.19
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Add Comment Developer Edit
Welcome! If you don't have a Git account, you can't do anything here.
You can add a comment by following this link or if you reported this bug, you can edit this bug over here.
(description)
Block user comment
Status: Assign to:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: pierre dot thierry at moine-fou dot org
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2003-03-12 10:15 UTC] pierre dot thierry at moine-fou dot org 
For consistency with other autoglobals, $GLOBALS shoudl also be accessible by $_GLOBALS. (or become $_GLOBALS, but this would break many scripts...)

Patches

Add a Patch

Pull Requests

Add a Pull Request

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2003-03-12 11:53 UTC] andrew@php.net 
I move to opt against this, as BC would be broken with scripts using $_GLOBALS against an older version of php.  It'd be good for consistency, but sometimes we have to substitute consistency for compatibility.

$GLOBALS is also kind of a variable of it's own.  It contains all globals, as opposed to the individual superglobals containing their sets.  $GLOBALS serves it's purpose just fine.

~ Andrew Heebner
 [2003-03-12 17:00 UTC] sniper@php.net 
Will not happen.
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2024 The PHP Group
All rights reserved. 		Last updated: Thu Apr 25 17:01:29 2024 UTC