Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:36898 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 69037 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2008 09:27:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Apr 2008 09:27:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@derickrethans.nl; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@derickrethans.nl; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain derickrethans.nl from 82.94.239.7 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@derickrethans.nl X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.94.239.7 mail.jdi-ict.nl Linux 2.6 Received: from [82.94.239.7] ([82.94.239.7:37417] helo=mail.jdi-ict.nl) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id EF/F0-04949-B0C8CF74 for ; Wed, 09 Apr 2008 05:27:40 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.jdi-ict.nl (8.13.7/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m399RZYm032264 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:27:36 +0200 Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:27:36 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: derick@kossu.ez.no To: PHP Developers Mailing List Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Missing signature violation warnings suck. From: derick@derickrethans.nl (Derick Rethans) Hello there, I've been working on some code, while developing on PHP 5.3. The code resembles the following structure: limit = $limit; $this->offset = $offset; } } ?> No problems at all while development, no warnings, no errors. Now when I deployed this on a PHP 5.2 machine it bombed out, with the following *correct* message: Fatal error: Declaration of ezcSearchFindQuerySolr::limit() must be compatible with that of ezcSearchQuery::limit() in /tmp/tmp/index.php on line 11 And this really sucks. I made a mistake in my code (wrongly implemented interface) and I get no warning (not even E_STRICT)... and then deploy it and it bails out on me. We can't have this. We need *warnings* (actually, it should be E_FATAL) for those cases in order to avoid problems. I don't know who removed this check, but please put it back in! regards, Derick -- Derick Rethans http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org