Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34299 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 12039 invoked by uid 1010); 31 Dec 2007 13:27:46 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 12024 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2007 13:27:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Dec 2007 13:27:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=email@fuer-et.de; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=email@fuer-et.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fuer-et.de from 62.75.137.136 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: email@fuer-et.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 62.75.137.136 fuer-et.de Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [62.75.137.136] ([62.75.137.136:60550] helo=eve.fuer-et.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DD/CE-02434-05EE8774 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:27:45 -0500 Received: from edea.local (p4FC84A37.dip.t-dialin.net [79.200.74.55]) by eve.fuer-et.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C421C59B6C for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:27:43 +0000 (UTC) To: internals@lists.php.net Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:27:41 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <8697e5310712310328n4c0fa235wb5654178028942bd@mail.gmail.com> <8697e5310712310409u289e643fo5d0b579a4fbd3311@mail.gmail.com> <4778E534.1040506@daylessday.org> In-Reply-To: <4778E534.1040506@daylessday.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <200712311427.48682.email@fuer-et.de> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Exceptions instead of Fatal Error when calling non existent method? From: email@fuer-et.de (Stefan Walk) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 31 December 2007 13:48:52 Antony Dovgal wrote: > Changing PHP's behavior in a backward-incompatible way that would affect > everyone and *forcing everyone* to use exceptions seems to be really bad > idea, especially taking into account that your problem can be easily solved > without it. What exactly is the backwards compatibility break here? Without the change, the code simply dies ... if you don't catch the exception, the code simply dies ... except you get a backtrace now and can handle the exception if you want to. Regards, Stefan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHeO5UpPjfcppEficRAng4AJ4v4G+PyT07cQTYupTgKFnOA130yQCeKWYy E2tzkWAHOmIKDc/CZw7Dtjw= =ArZH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----