Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69716
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.219.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <526488C1.8020400@php.net>
References: <3D.BC.23638.84CA1625@pb1.pair.com>
	<000301cecd1b$9aa133f0$cfe39bd0$@tutteli.ch>
	<CAH-PCH4y5qiXyLLw8ezv1RDzq-NomghAG0ZbPm0Kve=OZspTCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<526488C1.8020400@php.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 23:57:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN=kQJcGzska=K+52D_L_a+1r9SxqETEHJ4VriA3rfEPY_5s+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Watkins <krakjoe@php.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations
From: leverton@gmail.com (Matthew Leverton)

Since this would throw exceptions, could it look like (or be) a
final/abstract (although PHP doesn't allow that combo for some reason)
class with static methods?

Assert::isTrue($expr, $msg);

That syntax is already valid (so of course there are BC issues) and I
don't know how practical it is to optimize that away to nothing, but
it would be more consistent with regard to throwing exceptions and
would allow for a variety of different class methods.

--
Matthew Leverton

On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Joe Watkins <krakjoe@php.net> wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 12:15 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Robert Stoll <rstoll@tutteli.ch> wrote:
>>
>>> Heya,
>>>
>>> I do not know how much it concerns this RFC but I came across the
>>> following
>>> page about an extension named "Expect" when I was searching for RFC
>>> Expect
>>> with google.
>>> http://php.net/manual/en/book.expect.php
>>>
>>> I suppose there would be a name clash between the extension and the new
>>> expect keyword. I do not know how internals usually deal with such
>>> problems,
>>> especially if it is within an extension, but I am sure someone will know
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Robert
>>>
>>>
>> it was discussed on irc, there is not problem here, because the ext name
>> and the function name can't clash, and the ext doesn't have a function
>> with
>> the name of expect, so everything is fine afaik.
>>
>
> Rasmus has pointed out that there is an expect:// stream wrapper.
>
> So looks like we need a new name ?? Ideas ??
>
>
> Cheers
> Joe
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>