Re: [VOTE] Exceptions in the engine
| From: | Jordi Boggiano | Date: | Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:47:56 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [VOTE] Exceptions in the engine | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-84008@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 27/02/2015 14:31, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Am 23.02.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Nikita Popov:+1 on that, and as it seems the BaseException is going to pass, it might be good to quickly draft another RFC to amend that part. It seems people in general favor the fact that catch(Exception $e) does not catch those new engine exceptions, but there hopefully would not be much resistance against a cleaner scheme than a BaseException class. Also the Error (and possibly Throwable) class/interface might be put in a PHP namespace and then we avoid any potential BC issues, but that's perhaps another voting point :) CheersVoting on the engine exceptions RFC, which proposes to convert existing fatal and recoverable fatal errors into exceptions, has opened:I have voted yes on "Allow exceptions in the engine and conversion of existing fatals?" and no on "Introduce and use BaseException?" and would like to elaborate on the latter. I am sorry that I was unable to raise this concern earlier (did not really become aware of the RFC before it was put to the vote), but I would prefer the following:https://wiki.php.net/rfc/engine_exceptions_for_php7#voteThe primary vote requires a 2/3 majority, as this is a language change. A second vote will decide whether to use a BaseException based inheritance hierarchy. This vote uses a simple majority.* Introduce a Throwable interface * Let Exception implement the Throwable interface * Introduce an Error class that implements the Throwable interface * Use Error class as base class for exceptions raised by the engineThis would be along the lines of what Java does.