Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85684 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 44644 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2015 08:37:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Apr 2015 08:37:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:47761] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 1D/44-07407-AAFFC155 for ; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 03:36:59 -0500 Received: (qmail 11855 invoked by uid 89); 2 Apr 2015 08:36:55 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 11846, pid: 11852, t: 0.0675s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@109.156.131.40) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 2 Apr 2015 08:36:55 -0000 Message-ID: <551CFFA6.9050907@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 09:36:54 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <551C5EEE.2040900@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <551C5EEE.2040900@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] Reclassify E_STRICT notices From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 01/04/15 22:11, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> * mysqli::next_result() if there is no next result throws "There is no next >> > result set" > This I'm not sure should produce anything at all - it has the return > value of false, should be good enough. 'Traditional' scanning of a result set on most of the drivers simply takes the false/null as 'end of file' so any exception generated should be able to be switched off. But it's the same discussion as throwing exceptions when an object can't be created. One workflow simply needs the 'null', while an exception based workflow needs the exception? -- 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