Re: [VOTE] (was: Parameter checking in 5.2)

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Michael Wallner wrote: > [ ] (+1) please remove that redundant strictness again > [X] (-1) leave as it is, we need strict OO implementation > [ ] ( 0) what the hell are you talking about? It's not necessarily a *strict* OO implementaiton though, it's one that is correct. Strictness is where we would disallow setting object properties on the fly while not declaring that. I would actually like to see that throwing an e_strict too as that would make debugging easier as well. however, in the case of signatures you *have* to be strict ... but I guess we would only see the full implications if you're very well versed with OO theory (definitely not saying that I am). regards, Derick -- Derick Rethans http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org