Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23378 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 12690 invoked by uid 1010); 15 May 2006 16:33:04 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 12675 invoked from network); 15 May 2006 16:33:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 May 2006 16:33:04 -0000 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: steph@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.38.9.232 gw2.emini.dk Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([192.38.9.232:14864] helo=gw2.emini.dk) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 72/F0-19568-F3DA8644 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 12:33:04 -0400 Received: from foxbox (unknown [84.228.79.24]) by gw2.emini.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D98AFE23; Mon, 15 May 2006 18:32:59 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <048401c67773$d04253f0$6602a8c0@foxbox> Reply-To: "Steph Fox" To: "Brian Moon" , References: <138663365.20060514205903@marcus-boerger.de> <038d01c676f8$ab9b3380$6602a8c0@foxbox> <4468930C.1020709@dealnews.com> Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:31:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] E_ALL changes in 5.2/6.0 From: steph@zend.com ("Steph Fox") >> Why would anyone have E_ALL switched on anywhere but a dev box? > > Working with Phorum, I get to peer into lots of different hosting > companies setups when helping my users. I have seen many hosts that do > have E_ALL enabled and do not log errors because they have no way to > provide that log back to their users. Nor would the users have a > comprehension of the error log. > > For the enterprise, I would believe that nearly all production servers > shield error output from web pages in one way or another. However, I > believe that PHP has its roots in the small web site. If you start making > it hard on them to upgrade, you will see hosts that never upgrade their > PHP versions. That should be as simple as explicitly offering ;E_ALL & ~E_STRICT in the php.ini (and of course in the upgrade notes too). PHP 5 has been out there for 2 years now, I find it hard to believe that anyone involved - host or user - isn't aware that E_STRICT is on its way. Greg wrote earlier that the biggest issue PEAR has with E_STRICT nowadays comes when non-declared statics are called. Seriously, people writing that kind of code aren't likely to be naive users. I think it's going to be far worse if code that runs cleanly under PHP 4 throws a fatal error in PHP 6 with no mention of it being problematic in between! - Steph