Re: RFC: Replacing errors with Exceptions

On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Hannes Magnusson<hannes.magnusson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 15:43, Ben Scholzen 'DASPRiD'<mail@dasprids.de> wrote: >> To you both, this is especially, for library code like Zend Framework. >> The library cannot expect the user to have the error handle set, so it >> would have to replace the error handler before every line which it wants >> to try {} and reset it after the catch. This is not really a clean >> solution, at it can occur pretty often. > > Why do you have to replace it? because in case of a library, there is a "third-party" called "user". User might have his own opinion on error-handlers. And then, there's even worse case, when there are 2 or three libraries mixed in the single project > You RFC says you want to throw exceptions for all E_WARNINGs - thats > exactly the same as *not* restoring it. > Just register errorhandler for E_WARNING and thats it. > > The libxml extension already has functionality to suppress XML errors, > so your simplexml_load_file() example is bogus. > Better example is fopen() on network failures, but even then I don't > understand the problem. > > > -Hannes > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Alexey Zakhlestin http://www.milkfarmsoft.com/ Sent from St Petersburg, Russian Federation