Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:92433
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.194 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: bishop@php.net
Sender: bishop.bettini@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CADyq6sJP_BYEmmTWzJ4OvhcM9uto2EY+vefZTKovAaKBA8hs7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADFyporyFgnMgetcEj8FZUFs1Lbc_VidBsxg5jBE7J4_OFzKTQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+kxMuTFfqHZa4sXNv=Cfcm8w6eHdkKSGYiPdUiTJ1DGd6_VQQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADyq6sJP_BYEmmTWzJ4OvhcM9uto2EY+vefZTKovAaKBA8hs7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:42:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEYWF=6+t_Td5Gb4grOdkDogFZaEOxKs7FYonK9OsOuuybOncQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>, =?UTF-8?B?QnJvbmlzxYJhdyBCaWHFgmVr?= <after89@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1c00cfa66ee0530cbc387
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types
From: bishop@php.net (Bishop Bettini)

--001a11c1c00cfa66ee0530cbc387
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I voted "NO" due to previous discussion. TL;DR: this is FAR off the 80/20
> use-case for a language syntax change.
>
> ...
> These 3 exceptions usually result in separate handling anyway. If same
> handling is needed, you can as usual extract a private method  (if you are
> in a class) and deal with it there:
>
> ...
> Still, even in this case, I'd flag it up in a code review, as same handling
> for 3 different exception types generally (not always) means something is
> really wrong.
>
> So we are building a feature for a 1% case that, while simple to implement
> at parser-level in PHP, requires changes in all userland libraries that do
> parsing or rely on the AST.
>

I agree: the times this need arises are relatively rare, and in those cases
functional encapsulation cleanly handles the repetition. I would vote no,
were it not for one thing: union types
<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/union_types>.

catch constitutes a formal signature, exactly like a function signature. In
my mind, this proposal and the union types proposal are intrinsically tied.
If we have one, we must have the other. If not, we're inducing a sadness.

Since I do see the need for union types, and since I believe the two must
be accepted or rejected together, I voted yes.

--001a11c1c00cfa66ee0530cbc387--