Re: spl_autoload vs __autoload

On Jan 1, 2008 6:02 PM, Johannes Schlüter <johannes@php.net> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 22:45 +0100, Marcus Boerger wrote: > > Hello Johannes, > > > > I agree with Pierre here. How about finally making SPL built in > > always > > like ext/standard? > > First some statistics: According to my numbers[1], which are as wrong as > most other statistics about such stuff. 1% (36 of 3573) of the PHP 5 > installations have SPL disabled. So imo having it not forced-on is not a > big problem for users. The point is to do not have to worry about it being disabled. Besides that statistics are pretty useless in this case (consider a large intranet full of spless setups where you have to work and you are done...). > So in the end I'm +1 on the proposal for 5.3. so let enable it :) > > On a related note: Imo for users the real problems are different > extensions, which we won't enable by default (due to their dependency on > external stuff) and which might be available on some host or different > php.ini settings. For instance I was once annoyed by zlib not being > available on a shared host or png not available for gd. ISP not providing PNG? go to another :) But I thought we can't build ext/gd without png, I have to check that again. Happy new year :) -- Pierre http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org