Re: [RFC] prepend_include_path()/append_include_path()

On 14.02.2008, at 10:20, Markus Fischer wrote:

Lars Strojny wrote:

Am Donnerstag, den 14.02.2008, 00:56 +0100 schrieb Jochem Maas:

I think Lars has a point ... maybe set_include_path() could be given a second parameter instead to mitigate the need for seperate funcs?: set_include_path('foo', INCPATH_OVERRIDE); // default set_include_path('foo', INCPATH_APPEND); set_include_path('foo', INCPATH_PREPEND);

Thanks for your support, but this seems counter intuitive. Why should *set*_include_path() be used to *append* or *prepend* to the include path? Also learning another mouthful of constants is maybe suboptimal. Getting used to prepend_/append_...() is easy from my point of view, as the name is derived from what's currently present (set_include_path()).

Just my "senf" (like 2c, but that's what we call it in Austria :) Personally I never understood why we've set_include_path in the first place anyway. "ini_set('include_path', ..." does exactly the same and the C function does actually exactly this.

Short history lesson: The reason for set_include_path() is that many shared hosters disable ini_set(), yet many libraries/apps depend on users being able to control their include path. regards, Lukas