2012/9/4 Rasmus Lerdorf <ras...@lerdorf.com>: > On 09/03/2012 04:31 PM, Alex Aulbach wrote: >> 2012/9/4 Gustavo Lopes <glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt>: >>>> Following this logic, we'd have to convert all E_NOTICE and E_STRICT to >>>> fatal errors or exceptions - they are usually produced by programming >>>> errors and aren't meant to be caught by surrounding code (actually, >>>> can't). But I don't see anybody benefiting from this - as I don't see >>>> anybody benefiting from generator that will explode your application if >>>> you touch it twice. >> >> Nobody is forced to handle an notice-exception like a fatal exception. >> A notice-exception can be created write something into an error-log >> and tells PHP not to handle it any more (destroys itself). Could be >> all done in the construction of the exception. >> > > First, you got the quoting wrong. Please be more careful with that.
Sorry, was written from very old laptop which has problems, when I mark text. > And second, huh? Uncaught exceptions are by definition fatal. There is > no such thing as a notice exception. If we go down that road refer to my > email describing condition error systems. Longer term I think a > condition system would make a lot of sense for PHP, but we definitely > don't want to introduce some sort of bastard non-fatal exception. Maybe I had not the right words to describe, what I mean: I would like to see both worlds (current error-handling and exceptions) in PHP - just as I need it. Your proposal sounds quite interesting. For example: If an SQL-query fails, the query itself isn't normally very interesting (it's wrong, ok). I need to know where it was created and how. The error is not in the database, it's most times in the PHP-program... -- Alex Aulbach -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
