Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72254 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 79825 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2014 10:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 2014 10:00:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.204 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.204 mail4.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.204] ([217.147.176.204:58567] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3A/B0-09402-3DB02F25 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 05:00:52 -0500 Received: (qmail 2807 invoked by uid 89); 5 Feb 2014 10:00:46 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 2797, pid: 2804, t: 0.0634s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52 Received: from unknown (HELO linux-dev4.lsces.org.uk) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 5 Feb 2014 10:00:46 -0000 Message-ID: <52F20C7C.3040803@lsces.co.uk> Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:03:40 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 SeaMonkey/2.23 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <52EF4BF8.60005@sugarcrm.com> <52F14C66.3030806@gmail.com> <52F15B62.1070006@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Declare minimum PHP version required? From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Yes. New assert() is as efficient as declare(). > I cannot wait to use new assert()! Yasuo Please can you explain why you think this is so essential? The only place I can think that I would use this I ALSO need to advise the users that there is a problem. Adding 'assert' which apparently only has use while debugging just seems wrong. Alright I add vd() and similar myself when debugging code rather than using a 'debugger', but if I need to test something only at debug time then I'll just add code and remove it when I have sorted the problem. If it is a problem which will stop the code running, then it needs a proper response in the workflow anyway. ADOdb and smarty both have switches to enable debugging which can be switched on as required at runtime and I can't see any reason they would switch to using assert instead? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk