Re: Resource constants
| From: | Kalle Sommer Nielsen | Date: | Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:26:42 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Resource constants | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-41423@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
2008/10/27 Lukas Kahwe Smith <mls@pooteeweet.org>:
>
> On 27.10.2008, at 06:16, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>
>> 2008/10/26 Johannes Schlüter <johannes@php.net>:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 14:32 +0100, Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So, I propose its either being a "supported" feature, or simply put an
>>>> deprecation notice on it (5.3) and remove it HEAD. I personally vote
>>>> for the last option, as I don't think resources should be constants as
>>>> they do not have the constant value even though they do on some level.
>>>
>>> I recently discussed the same issue on IRC, (due to #45982) we can't get
>>> rid of resources in constants completely as we need that for STDIN,
>>> STDOU, STDERR constants.
>>
>> Yes I know, but still I think we should either making it a supported
>> feature or restrict registering resources on define().
>
>
> Huh, I wasnt even aware that define() supports anything but scalar values..
> At any rate I am very sure I never stumbled over code defining a constant
> with a ressource. Not a very good idea to support ressources, especially
> given the obvious WTF's this causes (as you rightly pointed out). So I see
> that an E_DEPRECATED would make sense. However I am not sure about removing
> this though, which would make the E_DEPRECATED a bit odd (why deprecate if
> we do not remove?).
E_DEPRECATED if we deprecated this feature, but I would be happy with
an E_STRICT if this behaviour will be kept. :)
>
> regards,
> Lukas Kahwe Smith
> mls@pooteeweet.org
>
>
>
>
--
Kalle Sommer Nielsen