Re: planning future BC Breaks - was Re: [PHP-DEV] fatal static call in php 6.0?

Yeah I heard, but it doesn't mean it'll become a part of the language (doesn't mean that it would not, but as usual, no discussion ;). What Alan suggested is already a part of the language, bares no additional overhead (both CPU cycles and brain cycles), and also (least important point) is very easy to implement. Zeev At 05:08 26/05/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:

Hello Zeev, actually there is a student working on a pre-processor for his summer of code project. And that will most likely cover versioning, too. best regards marcus Friday, May 26, 2006, 4:06:00 AM, you wrote: I read it as if it was declare() ;) I agree with Pierre that the best way to handle BC break is not to introduce it, but since that's not always 100% possible, this may make sense. Of course, it'll only work with stuff that is syntax-compliant with the currently running PHP version, but that covers most BC breakage. Zeev At 04:57 26/05/2006, Alan Knowles wrote:

actaully it should have been declare() - as I think the syntax for that almost works already, but yes, code doesnt get compiled if it's inside a block. Regards Alan Zeev Suraski wrote:

At 03:57 26/05/2006, Alan Knowles wrote:

Can we start concentrating on finding a real solution to BC breaks rather than throwing them out there and everyone complaining? define(php5) { stuff that breaks in php6 } define(php6) { stuff that doesnt work in PHP5 }

What's the semantics of that? The code inside doesn't get executed if it's not the define()'d PHP version? Zeev

Best regards, Marcus