On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, George Schlossnagle wrote: > > Is there a reason not to move non-continuable E_ERRORs to E_WARNINGs? > > This prevents us from adding another severity level and also allows us > > to make all E_ERRORs fatal in the process. > > This is a huge bc break. Raising the severity on non-continuable > errors and throwing exceptions for E_ERRORs produces no bc issues.
I'm confused about the warning levels. I guess it's best if I talk this out in an e-mail. :) In PHP 4, E_ERROR is fatal. In PHP 5, E_ERROR is (currently) also fatal. This always happens regardless of any exception handling. With exceptions, we have the ability to modify E_ERRORs to be non-fatal. However, even with exceptions, some errors should still be considered fatal. We have some choices: 1) Promote those few "truly fatal" errors to something else, like E_FATAL. Current E_ERRORs remain fatal, unless (now) caught by a catch() block. 2) Demote "recoverable E_ERRORS" to E_WARNING. Things that are E_ERROR are always fatal regardless of exception handling. 3) Something else, yet to be proposed. I guess I'm confused about why some E_ERRORs are now able to be handled in userland, but only by using exceptions. If these types of errors are now recoverable, shouldn't we let the programmer decide how they want to handle them? -adam -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] author of o'reilly's php cookbook avoid the holiday rush, buy your copy today! -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
