Posted by chx on
- It's semantically correct. Anonymous posts aren't all by the fictitious user zero, they're all by an undefined ("NULL") user.
- 0 = 0, but NULL <> NULL. We shouldn't be pretending any anonymous post is by the "same" author as another anonymous post.
- We lose the "magic" anonymous user row in the users table.
- Should we ever use foreign keys, we can automate anonymizing user content on user deletion.
- We have to do annoying things to even use the value zero in an auto-incrementing MySQL column.
- We can better enforce what UID columns allow anonymous values by choosing whether to allow or disallow NULL values.
- Because we already handle the anonymous user as a special case (a variable_get with no link) when rendering usernames, we can stop the confusing practice of joining anonymous user content onto the users table only to ignore everything we get from it.
PASSED: [[SimpleTest]]: [MySQL] 52,206 pass(es).
FAILED: [[SimpleTest]]: [MySQL] 51,341 pass(es), 1 fail(s), and 0 exception(s).
FAILED: [[SimpleTest]]: [MySQL] 51,327 pass(es), 1 fail(s), and 0 exception(s).
FAILED: [[SimpleTest]]: [MySQL] Drupal installation failed.
|#25||350407-uid-is-totally-NULL-1-D7.patch||8.28 KB||Dave Reid|
Failed: Failed to apply patch.