Re: [RFC] Optional Catch Block Body

Am 31.07.2025 um 17:53 schrieb Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] <imsop.php@rwec.co.uk>: > On 31/07/2025 14:46, Christian Schneider wrote: >>> $fh = try fopen($filePath, 'w') ignore (FileLockedException); >>> >> First of all: I'm wary because partial error handling seems dangerous to mel do I know >> all possible Exception types and which ones should abort and which ones should continue? >> > > That's kind of the point: it's for when you know how to handle some specific cases, > but want *anything else* to abort. > In this hypothetical example, the code is using an exclusive lock to avoid two processes > writing to the file; it wants to gracefully handle the specific scenario of "some other process > has the lock". If there's some other error, like "invalid file path", that > *should not* be suppressed. > But the current PHP I/O functions give no way to distinguish: > $fh = @fopen($filePath, 'w'); > if ( $fh === false ) { > // probably something else had the lock; could also be an invalid file path, or a > catastrophic disk failure ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > } If you have to handle null afterwards (e.g. avoiding writing to invalid $fh) then the "ignore" version does not really help much IMHO Realistically I think it would be something like if ($fh = try fopen($filePath, 'w') ignore (FileLockedException)) { ... } [else ...] vs. currently try { $fh = try fopen($filePath, 'w'); ... } catch (FileLockedException) { [...] } which does not seem much clearer to me. > I didn't intend to imply that this would replace all Warnings. Think of it more as > replacing the "returns false on error" part of the fopen() signature. ... so you would replace false for (some) errors by Exceptions, that's what I meant. Plus having some stuff return false and some things throw Exceptions seems weird too, that's why I said "all" in the first place. But false/null vs. Exceptions is a different, much broader topic, let's skip that for now ;-) Regards, - Chris