Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34274 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25294 invoked by uid 1010); 29 Dec 2007 01:28:58 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25279 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2007 01:28:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Dec 2007 01:28:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=slackmase2@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=slackmase2@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 66.249.82.233 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: slackmase2@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.249.82.233 wx-out-0506.google.com Received: from [66.249.82.233] ([66.249.82.233:27705] helo=wx-out-0506.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 25/7D-33385-8D2A5774 for ; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 20:28:56 -0500 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s14so1540552wxc.26 for ; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:28:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=xtuJr5cay/lvqUrPcbhmMXD0IyFxNbiqfWxrY78grWo=; b=dhuaGyvmr1yjU6FHsfkatgpLDZr7Tn1OfudkfO3xK8niU7qseL9pDKQtOoxeI/raN3h0VnhhY0t2NSifC70rculd6vVxh/vj6eHN5D64M1nrQQMbJl0kH/chw9N9uCy0rgS1casgFJ2cOLQaz6i9LuouzDHsG5S+CITdv1lGUhc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Utp9FdnLN6jot+PgPXJ3DVY1aMvHAi7+1iznbN5XNFh+6zTesm+4pMJZRjwE0V8pL610B3JReOFVYlYfScuDSuHJhn86HtHMFQTjoLOz5Kk6Z4QKwAJnQBtVuUvLfXrs1WN3FltCWCF66fk/1buAR+Ycb4fppVVo8zBDUufQRTY= Received: by 10.70.76.18 with SMTP id y18mr6678793wxa.53.1198891733786; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:28:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.33.12 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:28:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <99cd336d0712281728g6659d7e6pa3ed92db5574e63b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 11:58:53 +1030 To: Pierre Cc: david.coallier@nyphp.com, internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <99cd336d0712280356v680cc82fh3b1396c9c608bb96@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] spl_autoload vs __autoload From: slackmase2@gmail.com ("Andrew Mason") Thanks for your replies guys. Part of the reason why I asked here is because of a previous posting a while back where Stas seemed to suggest that the spl_autoloader was superior but from reading the api i didn't know if this was purely from a flexibility point of view or if there was more too it. I probably should have been more specific in my question. kind regards Andrew On 12/29/07, Pierre wrote: > On Dec 28, 2007 3:30 PM, wrote: > > On Dec 28, 2007 6:56 AM, Andrew Mason wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > Can anyone shed some light on the advantages of the spl_autoload over > > > the standard __autoload ? is there any ? > > > > > > > Please use php-general for that kind of question. > > This question makes sense here and brings yet again the question why > such things are not available by default. > > -- > Pierre > http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org >