Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23306 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 160 invoked by uid 1010); 12 May 2006 14:25:50 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 145 invoked from network); 12 May 2006 14:25:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 May 2006 14:25:50 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.79.190.163 r163.red.fastwebserver.de Received: from ([217.79.190.163:6667] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 7C/D3-19568-CEA94644 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:25:49 -0400 To: internals@lists.php.net,ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:25:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20060512162542.74b09c6d@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <28A0E031-9D8E-48DF-8B08-AA2D5AB6B2CE@prohost.org> References: <20060510175335.788a140d@localhost.localdomain> <446382A4.2080205@gmail.com> <28A0E031-9D8E-48DF-8B08-AA2D5AB6B2CE@prohost.org> Reply-To: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Newsreader: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.0 (GTK+ 2.8.6; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 217.79.190.163 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Win snapshot is not built (PHP 5.2) From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre) On Fri, 12 May 2006 10:17:23 -0400 ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) wrote: > > On 11-May-06, at 2:29 PM, Bastian Grupe wrote: > > > Marian Kostadinov wrote: > >> There is an issue about error_reporting setting in php.ini. I > >> took my php > >> 5.1 php.ini file and used it for 5.2. Strangely it seemed that > >> E_STRICT > >> suddenly turned on. > >> Is this an intended change or a bug? > > > > AFAIK it was intended to change E_ALL to include E_STRICT in 5.2+ > > > I think this was planned for PHP 6 not PHP 5.2. Although I don't see > a problem with making this change in 5.2 as well, does anyone have > any objections? Yes, I do not think it is wise to do it. Something quiet using E_ALL in 5.x must remain quiet using 5.2. However, there is maybe some edge cases where it makes sense. I do not have any in mind. -- Pierre