On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Kiall Mac Innes <ki...@managedit.ie> wrote:
> Yes, You could abstract the try/catch into a new (and un-needed) function
> to try and emulate the behavior of finally.. Unless, for example, you
> re-throw the exception after logging in the catch.
'finally' doesn't run for stuff that throws an exception not caught in
the try { } block, or an exception thrown again in the catch { } block
- does it?
I would hope not, since that means "something this block of code did
not anticipate at all - another sort of exceptional situation
altogether" and really should not run any more local code, nothing
until and unless there is a catch block somewhere further up that does
catch that exception.
Assuming I'm right and 'finally' runs only for normal completion and
for exceptions actually caught by the catch { } block attached to the
same try { }, then my refactoring still behaves exactly like
'finally'.
I am not convinced the function is unnecessary, either. Decomposition
is usually a good idea (:
> substitute for a native language construct
>
> try {
> $fh = fopen($filename);
>
> // Do some work on the file + encounter an error.
> throw new Exception();
> } catch (Exception $e) {
> $log->add(Log::ERROR, "Something went wrong", $e);
>
> throw $e;
> } finally {
> fclose($fh);
> }
>
> Thanks,
> Kiall
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Arvids Godjuks
> <arvids.godj...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> It's quite hard to think of a compelling example. Usually you just
>> write the code and realize that "Yea, a 'finally' statement would make
>> a lot of sense here".
>> I believe it's the kind of functionality that you learn to use in
>> time, just like __set, __get, __sleep, __wakeup. If first two are no
>> brainier these days, the last two to me where "wtf? does anyone use
>> that? Where I need them at all?!". It was like that for 3-4 years.
>> Until I got the code witch actually made an active use of these two
>> and I understood the purpose.
>> Same goes to finally. I remember using in JavaScript a few times, helped a
>> lot.
>> And it just makes sense to add to complete the try {} catch {} finally
>> {} template.
>> My 2 cents.
>>
>> 2012/2/28 Richard Lynch <c...@l-i-e.com>:
>> > On Tue, February 28, 2012 8:22 am, Kiall Mac Innes wrote:
>> >> +1000
>> >>
>> >> This is a feature that I've always wanted in PHP, My main reason being
>> >> to
>> >> reduce code duplication. eg
>> >>
>> >> try {
>> >> $fh = fopen($filename);
>> >>
>> >> // Do some work on the file + encounter an error.
>> >> throw new Exception();
>> >> } catch (Exception $e) {
>> >> // Log an error or something
>> > + if ($fh) fclose($fh); //many PHP file errors NULL out the $fh
>> > + }
>> > - > } finally {
>> > - > fclose($fh);
>> > - > }
>> >
>> > Another non-compelling example...
>> >
>> > Still not saying "finally" is a bad idea.
>> >
>> > Just want a compelling use case before I would vote...
>> >
>> > --
>> > brain cancer update:
>> > http://richardlynch.blogspot.com/search/label/brain%20tumor
>> > Donate:
>> >
>> https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FS9NLTNEEKWBE
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> >
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
--
Tom Boutell
P'unk Avenue
215 755 1330
punkave.com
window.punkave.com
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
