Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34306 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67632 invoked by uid 1010); 31 Dec 2007 18:31:43 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67616 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2007 18:31:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Dec 2007 18:31:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.191 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.198.191 rv-out-0910.google.com Received: from [209.85.198.191] ([209.85.198.191:56168] helo=rv-out-0910.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 37/C7-02434-C8539774 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:31:42 -0500 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k15so3745194rvb.23 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:31:40 -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=H2Q5U3HUF+oU3L49WmsU3HOCKQ+vQg3s6jjhjrtn744=; b=nlJ5ZWoLC4V4k37CZXd6gy5JT8mYsd/4bo5qb54tSJFgGgxukkCnoED5QM6zz45XdprnUtFoh4FH6YEkvG9Ntt+B8D6ATNZQM4VvpZQ6PdgtTsYyK58nBzewzZa8WfxHIpnLSj9fTugiNT6MmvWNO1uUjSvzEP7IuZlsIOtmnlk= 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=x7Wu2uPVSy0EZ3LNtnUzEpl4KcZqiSw/JxlKmCWBV5ZmAHrXHVXPZ7zJBwGbZCR/OzPAvZ0tI8shMhW7SaSWQb6OSclqNOtqrODaidXaxhpaUPwz5jCpsyYHfdbmX9d2T4LvRHBL6/W/FRUB8t5VBt33u0/r44Y4EMcbsdTcbaI= Received: by 10.141.132.8 with SMTP id j8mr6483816rvn.253.1199125900363; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:31:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.177.21 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:31:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 19:31:40 +0100 To: "Marcus Boerger" Cc: "Andrew Mason" , david.coallier@nyphp.com, internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <1944505528.20071230185830@marcus-boerger.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <99cd336d0712280356v680cc82fh3b1396c9c608bb96@mail.gmail.com> <99cd336d0712281728g6659d7e6pa3ed92db5574e63b@mail.gmail.com> <1944505528.20071230185830@marcus-boerger.de> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] spl_autoload vs __autoload From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre) On Dec 30, 2007 6:58 PM, Marcus Boerger wrote: > Hello Andrew, > > SPL simply allows two things: > a) a stack that hooks into __autoload > b) a default implementation that may be used (with ot without the former) > > We try to group functionality into extensions where we seem fit. And by the > time I implemented spl_autoload stuff it made sense to put it into the SPL > extension. Just because that extension was meant to be the home for more > advanced OOP stuff. I see nothing advanced in these features and a couple of other neither (we gave a short list already). Can we at least always enabled by in 5.3 and be done with it? It is annoying to have setups without it. Happy new year! :-) -- Pierre http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org