Re: wacky object idea

Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: > > Quoting Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>: > > > The problem isn't changing the convert_* functions. The problem is that not > > only will we have to change some logic I am not sure if we will end up with > > something consistent. I'm not saying it's not doable but things aren't > > always as simple as they look. And in this case, before diving into code > > and changing it, we have to seriously consider what we want, what the > > implications are, what the limitations would be, and then finally if it's > > feasible. > > What I want: An easy, short, and readable way to distinguish error values > from valid return types. Maybe is_subclass_of isn't too bad - it doesn't > seem as kludgy as it might. There's PEAR::isError() (doing is_subclass_of || get_class ==). It's still sort-of long, but I think it's ok. - Stig