Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84017
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <54F0839C.3010700@seld.be>
References: <CAF+90c8nqCBGWpsqdfy+EKekOm3Cw5_zzE_nKeyLK5pzROTueg@mail.gmail.com>
 <54F07FC7.8050901@php.net> <54F0839C.3010700@seld.be>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:28:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFp73XvfN1dDiyjWVRk6iZmCX_KOZrASYhg8H2u4f9-BpBJmmA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba61464ca668ba05101387fc
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Exceptions in the engine
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

--90e6ba61464ca668ba05101387fc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

+1 on Sebastian's suggestion. =)

I volunteer to either update the RFC or create a new one to resolve this
once "Exceptions in the engine" passes (which looks like a reality already
to me).

Just tell me which approach I should take and I'll happily write the RFC.

[]s,

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be> wrote:

> On 27/02/2015 14:31, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
>
>> Am 23.02.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Nikita Popov:
>>
>>> Voting on the engine exceptions RFC, which proposes to convert existing
>>> fatal and recoverable fatal errors into exceptions, has opened:
>>>
>>>      https://wiki.php.net/rfc/engine_exceptions_for_php7#vote
>>>
>>> The primary vote requires a 2/3 majority, as this is a language change.
>>>
>>> A second vote will decide whether to use a BaseException based
>>> inheritance
>>> hierarchy. This vote uses a simple majority.
>>>
>>
>>   I have voted yes on "Allow exceptions in the engine and conversion of
>>   existing fatals?" and no on "Introduce and use BaseException?" and
>>   would like to elaborate on the latter.
>>
>>   I am sorry that I was unable to raise this concern earlier (did not
>>   really become aware of the RFC before it was put to the vote), but I
>>   would prefer the following:
>>
>>     * Introduce a Throwable interface
>>     * Let Exception implement the Throwable interface
>>     * Introduce an Error class that implements the Throwable interface
>>     * Use Error class as base class for exceptions raised by the engine
>>
>>   This would be along the lines of what Java does.
>>
>
> +1 on that, and as it seems the BaseException is going to pass, it might
> be good to quickly draft another RFC to amend that part.
>
> It seems people in general favor the fact that catch(Exception $e) does
> not catch those new engine exceptions, but there hopefully would not be
> much resistance against a cleaner scheme than a BaseException class.
>
> Also the Error (and possibly Throwable) class/interface might be put in a
> PHP namespace and then we avoid any potential BC issues, but that's perhaps
> another voting point :)
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
Guilherme Blanco
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
GTalk: guilhermeblanco
Toronto - ON/Canada

--90e6ba61464ca668ba05101387fc--