Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69411
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH5-tODWcqdkiV+njdi1Kd2UntKtX+F6+DVUWWPcOQ-oaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH-PCH7-oZT7u0KB7bbDFNmZGeMiSUcU0-Shsp7rXmwaOb3muA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH5-tODWcqdkiV+njdi1Kd2UntKtX+F6+DVUWWPcOQ-oaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:01:39 +0200
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH5Nh=gPeKpf+6aNgOR_FBwixNL78VNaPye+QqROD3tt-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0149c60e21a89e04e78121de
Subject: Re: handling non-fatal compile-time errors
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--089e0149c60e21a89e04e78121de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've just bumped into https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=3D65322 recently,
>> and I would like you get some opinions on the issue.
>> Personally I think that it is a really bad design to introduce
>> pedantic(E_STRICT) errors which can break basic functionality of the eng=
ine
>> (calling the registered autoloader), so if there is no viable solution t=
o
>> make the autoloader work for these kind of errors, I would like to propo=
se
>> removing the offending errors and make it a rule to not add compile-time
>> non-fatal errors until the problem is resolved.
>>
>> ps: on a related note, somehow I got the feeling that Lester complaining
>> that E_STRICT errors fataling/crashing the application migrated to PHP 5=
.4
>> was related to this problem, and I'm a bit sad that we didn't managed to
>> figure this out back then.
>>
>> --
>> Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
>> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
>>
>
> for the record this is a known(as reported) since 2007:
> https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=3D42098
> and reported again in 2011:
> https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=3D54054&edit=3D2
>
> do we agree with the resolution from the 2007, eg. it is fine that there
> an undefined list of errors (from all and any error level) which behave
> differently than most others (as it won't trigger the autoloader) and eve=
n
> an E_STRICT error can blow up a reasonably written application (an expect=
ed
> error occurs, which happens to be compile time, which will trigger the
> autoloader, which will fail to autoload it's dependencies, which will
> generate class not found fatal error).
>
> I expect much more similar reports now that people start to migrate to
> 5.4/5.5 where E_STRICT is part of E_ALL(and that the error reporting
> infrastructure in an average application is more likely to depend on
> autoloading nowadays).
>
> --
> Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
>

bump.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--089e0149c60e21a89e04e78121de--