Re: Re: Bug #17022: enhance socket_strerror(errno) tomake errno optional
| From: | Tom Robinson | Date: | Mon, 06 May 2002 05:31:49 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Bug #17022: enhance socket_strerror(errno) tomake errno optional | ||
| Groups: | php.dev | ||
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-83736@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
As a programmer fairly new to the PHP socket functions, there is a long enough list of them already.
For the most part, they match the C functions.
socket_last_error() doesn't have a C equivalent, because of the difference in environment.
But in the PHP tradition, socket_last_error has two flavours, where the shortest one is the one that
can be used 90% of the time.
I personally would not want to see yet another function for socket_last_errstr() - ever time a new
function is added to the list, it makes the list a little bit longer and a little bit less
approachable for newcomers. My suggestion was to shorten up the case where socket_strerror is used
90% of the time.
I would extend my suggestion to say I would NOT want a new socket_last_errstr($sock) function.
It was just a simple little suggestion for a coding shortcut, with no new functionality added,
therefore not worthy of its own new function.
Since no new functionality is added, I can (and did) code my own in PHP for use after almost all my
socket calls.
...Tom
>I think the requested behavior does not belong in socket_strerror()
>simply because it would not match the primary and other use of
>socket_last_error(). In other words, you would not be able to replace
>the behavior of
>
>socket_strerror(socket_last_error($sock));
>
>What could be possible, would be to add something like
>socket_last_errstr, which could then follow the same semantics of
>socket_last_error. This would be a much more consistent.
>i.e.
>socket_last_errstr($sock);
>socket_last_errstr();
>
>Would this be acceptable?