Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:9265 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96088 invoked by uid 1010); 16 Apr 2004 16:26:27 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96042 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2004 16:26:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO xaxa.search.ch) (195.141.85.118) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2004 16:26:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xaxa.search.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3356CF9E; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:26:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by xaxa.search.ch (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 88C906CFA8; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:26:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cschneid.com (ultrafilter2-i [192.168.85.3]) by xaxa.search.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id C98656CF9E; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:26:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <40800930.2070302@cschneid.com> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:26:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040114 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de-ch MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john@coggeshall.org Cc: Derick Rethans , PHP Internals References: <00cc01c422e1$46a4adc0$0100a8c0@pc07653> <1082070778.17792.18.camel@coogle.localdomain> <1082130174.31819.51.camel@coogle.localdomain> <4080035B.1090404@cschneid.com> <1082132272.31824.56.camel@coogle.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1082132272.31824.56.camel@coogle.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on xaxa.search.ch X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12pre8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Exceptions and a real example: Tidy From: cschneid@cschneid.com (Christian Schneider) John Coggeshall wrote: > the best compromise I can reach without discarding exceptions entirely, > which I believe is even more wrong for OO code. I disagree. I lost track over the last couple of days, what is everyone else's view on this? - Chris