Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- rfc:ldap_exop [2017/06/26 15:22] – mcmic
+++ rfc:ldap_exop [2017/06/29 14:29] – mcmic
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 This RFC also wish to introduce helper functions for common EXOP usage:
 <code php>
-mixed ldap_exop_whoami(resource $link)
+bool ldap_exop_whoami(resource $link, string &$result)
 bool ldap_exop_passwd(resource $link, string $user, string $oldpw, string $newpw [, string &$genpw])
 </code>
-The first one would call whoami EXOP and return either the result or FALSE upon failure.
+The first one would call whoami EXOP and fill $result with the result. Return TRUE or FALSE upon failure.
 The second one would call passwd EXOP and return TRUE or FALSE upon failure. If $newpw is empty, $genpw will be filled with the generated password for the user. If $user is empty, it affects the bound user.
-The author of the original patch stated that technically ldap_start_tls is an exop helper and therefore could be renamed ldap_exop_start_tls. We fill this would be a useless BC.
+The author of the original patch stated that technically ldap_start_tls is an exop helper and therefore could be renamed ldap_exop_start_tls. We feel this would be a useless BC.
-The original patch (and current code) provided a possibility to get a result object from helpers as well, and provided ldap_parse_exop_* helpers to parse the result objects from these operations. We fill this is too complex and does not add anything to the RFC so we intend to leave them out.
+The original patch (and current code) provided a possibility to get a result object from helpers as well, and provided ldap_parse_exop_* helpers to parse the result objects from these operations. We feel this is too complex and does not add anything to the RFC so we intend to leave them out.
 ===== Examples =====
@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 }
 // Same thing with the helper
-$identity = ldap_exop_whoami($link);
+if (ldap_exop_whoami($link, $identity)) {
-if ($identity !== FALSE) {
   echo "Connected as $identity\n";
 } else {
@@ Line 92: / Line 91: @@
 ===== Open Issues =====
   - Should the function names contain the word "exop" or is it a technical detail which should be hidden from the developer?
-  - Should we include a constant for LDAP_EXOP_REFRESH, for the sake of completeness, even if this EXOP won’t be used by PHP code as all PHP LDAP operations are synchrone (in the current code state).
+  - Should we include a constant for LDAP_EXOP_CANCEL, for the sake of completeness, even if this EXOP won’t be used by PHP code as all PHP LDAP operations are synchrone (in the current code state).
-  - Should helper functions return a mixed, or a boolean and have an out parameter? ("mixed ldap_exop_whoami($link)" vs "bool ldap_exop_whoami($link, &$result)")
+  - The $retoid field seems useless for all EXOPs listed in the constant section, they either leave it empty or fill it with the same value as $reqoid. So maybe this field should be moved to the last position to be easily omitted. But this may result in a less natural order: //reqoid, reqdata, retdata, retoid// (though most of the time it will be //reqoid, reqdata, retdata//).
-  - How would someone go about generating the needed ber-encoded data to pass ldap_exop in PHP? Should this RFC also define functions to handle ber-encoded data?
+  - Functions throws E_WARNING for all errors and failures. ldap_error() can be used to get the last error.
 ===== Unaffected PHP Functionality =====

Differences

Page Tools