Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:16708 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 30330 invoked by uid 1010); 15 Jun 2005 21:48:41 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 30315 invoked from network); 15 Jun 2005 21:48:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Jun 2005 21:48:41 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.112.227.169 ipx11223.ipxserver.de Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([212.112.227.169:34559] helo=ipx11223.ipxserver.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 1.2 r(5656M)) with SMTP id FD/A9-20931-832A0B24 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:48:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ipx11223.ipxserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E98DF0084; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:49:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ipx11223.ipxserver.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ipx11223 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01641-07; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:49:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (i3ED6B459.versanet.de [62.214.180.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ipx11223.ipxserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA83DF004B; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:49:00 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <42B0A237.9010005@php.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:48:39 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stanislav Malyshev Cc: internals@lists.php.net References: <42B03CF6.9000000@php.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by somedaemon at backendmedia.com Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] forward compatibility "public" in 4.4 From: lsmith@php.net (Lukas Smith) Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > I wonder what was the original purpose of PHP5 emitting warning when > seeing 'var'? What are you basically saying now is "I want PHP4 code that > wouldn't have messages on my class vars if run in PHP5". But I'm sure > there was some idea behind these warnings, not? There was a reason. So that people who mark things "var" because there was no true PPP available will be notified that they are using deprecated syntax. To quote Andi "It was meant to help people find var's so that they can be explicit about the access modifiers." So to me it seems if I have no private/protected, but only public properties I would like to be able to preempt a needless warning as I migrade to PHP5. I dont agree however we should make protected and private simply behave as var in PHP 4.x as this would indeed just undermine the entire point of the E_STRICT warning. regards, Lukas