Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:45380 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 8579 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2009 02:05:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 25 Aug 2009 02:05:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=greg@chiaraquartet.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=greg@chiaraquartet.net; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain chiaraquartet.net from 209.85.222.174 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: greg@chiaraquartet.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.222.174 mail-pz0-f174.google.com Received: from [209.85.222.174] ([209.85.222.174:42830] helo=mail-pz0-f174.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 50/00-08544-3E6439A4 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:05:23 -0400 Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4so1262510pzk.29 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.100.13 with SMTP id c13mr8116285wam.65.1251165903966; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from monster.local ([76.84.30.125]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm76623pxi.5.2009.08.24.19.05.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A9346CA.3070608@chiaraquartet.net> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:04:58 -0500 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070807) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ilia Alshanetsky CC: Stanislav Malyshev , 'PHP Internals' References: <4A92D936.2010107@zend.com> <4A931A1C.804@chiaraquartet.net> <39F20BFC-DAA0-4403-A52E-62CE5F4CF0FE@prohost.org> In-Reply-To: <39F20BFC-DAA0-4403-A52E-62CE5F4CF0FE@prohost.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [patch] error masks From: greg@chiaraquartet.net (Greg Beaver) Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > > On 24-Aug-09, at 6:54 PM, Greg Beaver wrote: >> >> 2) as long as the patch does not break any backwards compatibility >> (error logging still works as it always did independent of error_mask, >> user error handlers still get the same stuff), why would we care? There >> is a time and place for being academic about fixing things and it is >> called development, not production. > > You must not have any bugs in production environment, I am very envious. > :-) Ilia, I don't see how this kind of emotional hyperbole contributes positively to the discussion. If I understand you right, you're arguing that people should never use code in production that emits errors. That is certainly the goal. It's also not always possible to do this when relying upon third-party code which may have been written for a pre-E_STRICT or a pre-E_DEPRECATED php version. What I don't understand is why you think this: is better than: IF (and a big if) no user error handler is in place, which should pass all possible errors into the error handler. If your fear is that third party people might do something horrendous like: That's also easily solved by making it INI_SYSTEM. Greg