Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:70534
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com from 209.85.128.176 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c9jDnOrUqOGsbuqRFDWHX_xZsegVsrgN_5XOXYU8U14rg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF+90c9Hxzi_JhyZkyi6Ly9zxWjgFsCBsvgzH7a8n-ce3kPKYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<bf72a3b3f08321543979442e053092fb@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c9jDnOrUqOGsbuqRFDWHX_xZsegVsrgN_5XOXYU8U14rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 16:33:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPgLKihoqsmrXVPXSxVJS3y4oSfY7AtCVk9B-r+P6xV1Ov_R_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b677878ae403004ed06c4fa
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Allowing use of exceptions in the engine
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)

--047d7b677878ae403004ed06c4fa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Zeev!
>
> I think this is a misunderstanding... I'm not suggesting to simply let the
> engine continue after an E_ERROR - as you pointed out, that would likely
> just crash it a few lines further down.
>
> This RFC is mainly a policy RFC: The goal is to allow the use of
> exceptions in the engine and to allow changing existing fatal errors to
> exceptions. The change from fatal errors to exceptions needs to happen
> manually, by adjusting the surrounding code to support continued execution
> (usually that means freeing resources + returning). A lot of fatal errors
> are easy to change, others are very hard or impossible. Changing fatal
> errors to exceptions rather than recoverable errors is both more useful to
> the end user and technically easier (as recoverable errors need to continue
> execution in the same codepath, which is often a lot harder to implement
> and find appropriate semantics for), which is why I'm suggesting this
> particular course of action.
>
> So, basically what I'm suggest is what you say in the last paragraph, just
> going directly to exceptions rather than converting to E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR
> :)
>
> Hope this is a bit clearer.
>

OK, got you.   Not using exceptions in the engine was also a design
decision (so that we don't force OO concepts on non-OO people) - need to
think if it still makes sense and get back to the vote.

Thanks!

Zeev

--047d7b677878ae403004ed06c4fa--