Re: Re: [Zend Engine 2] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Case sensitivity: Conclusion(?)
| From: | Stig S. Bakken | Date: | Fri, 08 Feb 2002 13:39:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [Zend Engine 2] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Case sensitivity: Conclusion(?) | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-79887@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 14:30, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 02:20 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> >On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 14:14, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > > At 01:42 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> > > >On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 13:38, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> > > > > Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > > > > > At 09:20 PM 2/8/2002 +0900, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>> Name space BC problem is "bad", since script may
> > > > > >>>> misbehave
> > > > > >>>> without proper error message where to fix.
> > > > > >>>> It's a bad BC problem since it's harder to
> > > > > >>>> fix/notice.
> > > > > >>>> In some cases, it seems works well while it's not.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> The question is how often does this breakage actually happen
> > > > > >>> in
> > real
> > > > > >>> life and not theoretically on the mailing list.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Then we have different priority for BC problems :(
> > > > > >> BC _with_ error is not as bad as BC _without_ error for me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Theoretically I agree but if BC _without_ error happens very
> > rarely then
> > > > > > I don't think it's that bad. In any case, we could always
> > > > > > have an
> > > > > > E_MIGRATION for people migrating.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Great!
> > > > > I personally prefer to have E_DEBUG, E_INFO and clean up error
> > > > > level for functions. There about 2300 php_error/zend_error :)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll happily contribute for it.
> > > > >
> > > > > E_INFO:
> > > > > Error like compatibility info (migration)
> > > > > E_DEBUG:
> > > > > Error useful for debugging script but not appropriate
> > > > > for production scripts.
> > > > > E_NOTICE
> > > > > Error that can be a bug in script but may be ingored.
> > > > > E_WARNING
> > > > > Error taht cannot be ignored. (Error must be handled)
> > > > > E_ERROR
> > > > > Fatal error.
> > > >
> > > >Good idea. E_DEBUG may be a good alternative to php_printf(). Heh.
> > >
> > > Fine tuning errors is probably a good idea. E_PEDANTIC?
> >
> >A lot of errors that are E_NOTICE today would definitely be better off
> >as E_PEDANTIC. Undefined array indexes come to mind. What else?
> >E_INFO may be a bit vague (and probably attract a lot of "misc"
> >errors). What about E_COMPAT for compatibility issues?
>
> E_PENDATIC, E_COMPAT, E_NOTICE, E_WARNING, E_ERROR
> Do you see E_PENDANTIC and E_NOTICE as much different? Can we differentiate
> between them?
Well, E_PENDANTIC is more specific, its use should be limited to really
strict warnings, just like in C compilers. Just move those errors from
E_NOTICE to E_PEDANTIC and leave the remaining E_NOTICEs as they are.
Or are you saying you see less point in having E_NOTICE with E_PEDANTIC?
- Stig