Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130168
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEKnhAEO8w0GJXTVyH_nwK8nGQGdJcNNkGOPMnYDVrcsNGrm4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEKnhAE5iG6VfgS6=+FrpbDN5T-7iOA7j0gN9n-pr0HmBe=3EA@mail.gmail.com> <7ECDE859-153C-4732-A3AB-716540489413@cschneid.com>
In-Reply-To: <7ECDE859-153C-4732-A3AB-716540489413@cschneid.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:17:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEKnhAG+d-eZedmweGtQdWhvN7UWynnrdxcj75_wSYPd=O-MXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Stream Error Handling Improvements
To: Christian Schneider <cschneid@cschneid.com>
Cc: PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008378dd064ba5d4c1"
From: bukka@php.net (Jakub Zelenka)

--0000000000008378dd064ba5d4c1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 9:24=E2=80=AFAM Christian Schneider <cschneid@cschn=
eid.com>
wrote:

> Am 29.12.2025 um 19:52 schrieb Jakub Zelenka <bukka@php.net>:
> > - The storing of errors is done at the end of the operation grouping an=
d
> contains only the last grouped errors. So the function name was changed t=
o
> stream_get_last_error(). It returns just a single StreamError which has a
> next property pointing to the next error if there is any.
>
> I assume the chaining was based on Exception chaining but the example cod=
e
> under
>         https://wiki.php.net/rfc/stream_errors#error_chaining
> looks a bit clunky to me and I was wondering if returning an array of
> StreamError would not be more straightforward, i.e. one could then use
> foreach, empty(), count(), array_first(), array_last(), array_find() etc.
> instead of methods like while, $e->count(), $e->hasCode() which would mak=
e
> it feel more idiomatic to me.
>
>
I thought about it and I think the exception like chaining makes a bit more
sense here. The thing is that in majority cases there will be only one
error so it would be most of the time array with just one element which
seems a bit wasteful. But if others also feel that array would be better, I
wouldn't mind to do follow up RFC as I don't really feel strongly about it.
Just let me know during the vote and if there's more people asking for it,
I will do a follow up RFC. Alternatively it could just implement iterator
or array access, which I was thinking about, but not sure if it's not too
messy.

Kind regards,

Jakub

--0000000000008378dd064ba5d4c1
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi,</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_co=
ntainer"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 9:24=
=E2=80=AFAM Christian Schneider &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:cschneid@cschneid.com=
">cschneid@cschneid.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,=
204);padding-left:1ex">Am 29.12.2025 um 19:52 schrieb Jakub Zelenka &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:bukka@php.net" target=3D"_blank">bukka@php.net</a>&gt;:<br>
&gt; - The storing of errors is done at the end of the operation grouping a=
nd contains only the last grouped errors. So the function name was changed =
to stream_get_last_error(). It returns just a single StreamError which has =
a next property pointing to the next error if there is any.<br>
<br>
I assume the chaining was based on Exception chaining but the example code =
under<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"https://wiki.php.net/rfc/stream_erro=
rs#error_chaining" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://wiki.php.ne=
t/rfc/stream_errors#error_chaining</a><br>
looks a bit clunky to me and I was wondering if returning an array of Strea=
mError would not be more straightforward, i.e. one could then use foreach, =
empty(), count(), array_first(), array_last(), array_find() etc. instead of=
 methods like while, $e-&gt;count(), $e-&gt;hasCode() which would make it f=
eel more idiomatic to me.<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I thought=
 about it and I think the exception like chaining makes a bit more sense he=
re. The thing is that in majority cases there will be only one error so it =
would be most of the time array with just one element which seems a bit was=
teful. But if others also feel that array would be better, I wouldn&#39;t m=
ind to do follow up RFC as I don&#39;t really feel strongly about it. Just =
let me know during the vote and if there&#39;s more people asking for it, I=
 will do a follow up RFC. Alternatively it could just implement iterator or=
 array access, which I was thinking about, but not sure if it&#39;s not too=
 messy.</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Jak=
ub</div></div></div>

--0000000000008378dd064ba5d4c1--