Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I don't feel like arguing about it because hasMethod() is good enough
> for me.
Do we not need hasProperty() (for getProperty()) and hasConstant() (for
getConstant()), too?
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69
And now the attachment.
At 11:31 AM 12/25/2004 +0100, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Why not just returning null when a method does not exist?
> Actually CALLING a non-existing method should be treated as an error...
Because
try {
$class = new ReflectionClass($this
Sebastian,
I don't feel like arguing about it because hasMethod() is good enough for me.
Look at the attached example. It should make you understand why throwing an
exception *without* having something like hasMethod() is very inefficient.
Exceptions should be used for error situations. If a refl
Christian Schneider wrote:
> You don't have to treat everything like a nail just because you have a
> hammer.
You are right. And would you (or someone else) have spoken up between
the time I committed the change and the release of PHP 5.0.3 I would
have been okay with reverting.
But now the c
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
The Reflection API was introduced at the same time as exceptions. It
therefore makes perfect sense to make consistent use of exception in
the Reflection API.
You don't have to treat everything like a nail just because you have a
hammer.
So the people who know how to
This doesn't really clear it out.
I can either use the "cleaner" method, and an exception would be
raised when I'd try to call NULL(), or, have the OPTION to check
whether it's NULL before calling it. IMHO It's much more consistent
and clean.
You STILL can use exceptions the way you did, and in AD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Why not just returning null when a method does not exist?
> Actually CALLING a non-existing method should be treated as an error...
Because
try {
$class = new ReflectionClass($this);
$method = $class->getMethod($this->name);
}
catch (Reflection
Christian Schneider wrote:
>> Calling getMethod() for a method that does not exist is an error and
>> should be consistently treated as such by raising an exception.
>
> I disagree. The same could be said for getenv().
The Reflection API was introduced at the same time as exceptions. It
therefo
Why not just returning null when a method does not exist?
Actually CALLING a non-existing method should be treated as an error...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:47:26 +0100, Christian Schneider
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> > You assume wrong. My point is that you should not u
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
You assume wrong. My point is that you should not use getMethod() when
you do not know whether or not the method exists.
Ok, let's look at the options then:
5.0 - getMethods() [sure, you could probably use clever tricks to make
this shorter but the general clumsiness wi
Christian Schneider wrote:
> I assume that Sebastian would use something along the lines of
You assume wrong. My point is that you should not use getMethod() when
you do not know whether or not the method exists.
If you do not know whether or not the method exists use getMethods() in
PHP 5.0
Hello Derick,
in 5.0 the solution is to use getMethods() and look for it. Since that is
not the best to do and not what we really want to i'll commit johannes'
patch for hasMethod() later today.
marcus
Friday, December 24, 2004, 1:00:44 PM, you wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, Sebastian Bergmann
Derick Rethans wrote:
I think it doesn't make sense if there is no method to actually check if
it's there. Now you start throwing exeptions without having a way to
avoid it. THAT is crazy.
I assume that Sebastian would use something along the lines of
try
{
$reflectionClass->getMethod("foo"
Derick Rethans wrote:
> THAT is crazy.
Throwing away consistency is crazy, too.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To uns
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > Sebastian, throwing an exception is relatively slow and cumbersome and
> > sucks if you want to do something like a Delegation model and run
> > through objects and check if a method can be called. Having exceptions
> > throw
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Sebastian, throwing an exception is relatively slow and cumbersome and
> sucks if you want to do something like a Delegation model and run
> through objects and check if a method can be called. Having exceptions
> thrown each time the object doesn't have the method is crazy.
Adding hasMethod() sounds good to me.
Sebastian, throwing an exception is relatively slow and cumbersome and
sucks if you want to do something like a Delegation model and run through
objects and check if a method can be called. Having exceptions thrown each
time the object doesn't have the metho
Timm Friebe wrote:
>
> I think we could all agree on
>
> bool hasMethod(string $name)
>
> (and not changing getMethod()) though, right?
Yes, although I do not think that hasMethod() is really needed.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0
On Thu, 2004-12-23 at 07:43 +0100, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > Exceptions should be thrown for errors.
>
> And trying to get a method that does not exist is an error.
...which is fine, but without an elegant way of checking if that method
exists I don't think it should be
Hello Timm,
Thursday, December 23, 2004, 1:06:01 AM, you wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 14:28 -0800, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems that in the past few months ReflectionClass::getMethod() was
>> changed to throw an Exception if the method doesn't exist.
> -- snip --
> revision 1.11
Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> methods, but I think it is better to use the same error signalling in
- methods,
+ exception,
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69
--
PHP Internals -
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Exceptions should be thrown for errors.
And trying to get a method that does not exist is an error.
> Can anyone shed some light on this? Why was this changed?
To make consistent use of ReflectionException, IIRC.
For instance, the following code
throws an Reflect
Thanks Timm.
Sebastian, what do you think?
Andi
At 01:06 AM 12/23/2004 +0100, Timm Friebe wrote:
On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 14:28 -0800, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that in the past few months ReflectionClass::getMethod() was
> changed to throw an Exception if the method doesn't exist.
-- sni
On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 14:28 -0800, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that in the past few months ReflectionClass::getMethod() was
> changed to throw an Exception if the method doesn't exist.
-- snip --
revision 1.113
date: 2004/07/19 19:14:10; author: sebastian; state: Exp; lines: +9
-5
Hi,
It seems that in the past few months ReflectionClass::getMethod() was
changed to throw an Exception if the method doesn't exist. I don't
understand the reasoning because as it's a reflection API I would expect it
to return false and not an exception. Exceptions should be thrown for
errors.
25 matches
Mail list logo
