Re: Re: alternative to the fopen() hack in autoloaders

On 22.11.2009, at 18:01, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: > I have updated the current RFC accordingly: > http://wiki.php.net/rfc/autoload_include > > So there are three approaches listed in the RFC: > 1) http://wiki.php.net/rfc/autoload_include#proposal > add a new alternative to include, which works the same except that for missing files it returns > null and on success it returns the file location (unless the file already returns something else > explicitly) > > 2) > http://wiki.php.net/rfc/autoload_include#add_stream_support_to_includerequire > add stream support to include/require > > 3) �FBǢOj��� > Ͷ?�6http://wiki.php.net/rfc/autoload_include#add_function_to_resolve_the_include_path > fix up stream_resolve_include_path() to support streams. > > I would like to call for a vote on the above. For 1) and 3) I invite everybody to optionally > also submit a proposal for a name. Finally optionally include in your vote if would like to see this > feature added to 5.3.2 or if it should wait for the next minor/major version update instead. I would like to raise this point once more. I am a bit surprised that nobody voted, but I got a lot of feedback from people about this proposal offlist when I first brought this to the list. Then again a lot of those people were not "core" developers. The fact remains however that a large number of frameworks rely on the @fopen() hack and so offering a better solution sooner rather than later seems like a very good idea. Then again, no vote essentially means sticking with the status quo aka stream_resolve_include_path() (which needs some additional love as the RFC states to really serve for what it was originally intended) when PHP6 comes out. regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith mls@pooteeweet.org