Re: Serializing exceptions

Hi! > I think we should discuss if (un)serialization is a first-class > operation in the language and if so, we should try to make everything > serializable. Currently, we introduce more and more unserializable I don't think we can, not unless we can serialize PHP code (like Java can have JARs with bytecode). Otherwise, something like closure is inherently not serializable. Moreover, something resource-bound is not serializable either since it depends on something external. > If we don't want serialization as a first-class operation, we should I'm not sure what you mean by "first-class operation". We certainly want most objects be serializable, and they are. But some are not, and would never be. The question is - is Exception one of those? I think yes, but I'd like to hear if somebody says otherwise. > make objects not serializable by default unless they implement > serializable or __sleep()/__wakeup() and add an is_serializable() method > to check if an object is serializable. But currently serialization gets > more and more unreliable/prone to runtime errors. That's because implementers of classes are not careful to account for serialization. However, I don't think we need any drastic changes here. -- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@gmail.com