Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23676 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 90751 invoked by uid 1010); 26 May 2006 02:06:06 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 90736 invoked from network); 26 May 2006 02:06:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 May 2006 02:06:06 -0000 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: zeev@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.74.107.235 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([80.74.107.235:52512] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 78/77-17316-D8266744 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 22:06:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 23729 invoked from network); 26 May 2006 02:05:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO zeev-notebook.zend.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 May 2006 02:05:45 -0000 Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060526050422.08680c20@zend.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 05:06:00 +0300 To: Alan Knowles Cc: Christian Schneider ,internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <4476608C.6070503@akbkhome.com> References: <138663365.20060514205903@marcus-boerger.de> <038d01c676f8$ab9b3380$6602a8c0@foxbox> <44685D24.2000801@php.net> <1147708994.14148.23.camel@notebook.local> <16710545416.20060515202714@marcus-boerger.de> <1147721541.14148.47.camel@notebook.local> <4468DB43.1020005@emini.dk> <7.0.1.0.2.20060515194051.02b32ef8@zend.com> <1148496966.19173.79.camel@notebook.local> <454303585.20060524213714@marcus-boerger.de> <44765279.8000601@akbkhome.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060526040633.086814a0@zend.com> <4476608C.6070503@akbkhome.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] planning future BC Breaks - was Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0? From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski) I read it as if it was declare() ;) I agree with Pierre that the best way to handle BC break is not to introduce it, but since that's not always 100% possible, this may make sense. Of course, it'll only work with stuff that is syntax-compliant with the currently running PHP version, but that covers most BC breakage. Zeev At 04:57 26/05/2006, Alan Knowles wrote: >actaully it should have been declare() - as I think the syntax for that >almost works already, but yes, code doesnt get compiled if it's inside a >block. > >Regards >Alan > >Zeev Suraski wrote: > > At 03:57 26/05/2006, Alan Knowles wrote: > >> Can we start concentrating on finding a real solution to BC breaks > >> rather than throwing them out there and everyone complaining? > >> > >> define(php5) { > >> stuff that breaks in php6 > >> } > >> define(php6) { > >> stuff that doesnt work in PHP5 > >> } > > > > What's the semantics of that? The code inside doesn't get executed if > > it's not the define()'d PHP version? > > > > Zeev