RE: [PEAR-DEV] [Fwd: Re: PEAR framework changes for PHP5]

The introduction of "PEAR 5" is an absolute nightmare of a thought for myself as I have an entire commercial framework based on the current PEAR. As a developer whose base class extends from the base PEAR class I have more than a few concerns. 1.) Will PEAR_Error function as it does now? 2.) Will PEAR function as it does now? 3.) Has anyone done an audit to see which packages will be/have been abandoned? When PHP5 becomes stable I want to be sure all of my favorite packages are still around. 4.) What steps will be taken to make sure the PEAR base classes are backwards compatible? I have this horrific fear that I'll be going through 30k lines of code and updating my API all along the way when PHP5 comes out. --Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Tobias Schlitt [mailto:tobias@schlitt.info] > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 5:59 PM > To: pear-dev@lists.php.net > Subject: [PEAR-DEV] [Fwd: Re: PEAR framework changes for PHP5] > > > Hi PEARs! > > The following text is just my personal opinion and my > personal view on > the upcoming things. > > Please think about the following issues and add your comments > (this is > adressed to all of you): > > PHP 5 will bring some cool new features, which should get > used by pear > packages and the pear framework. too. Following you will find some > issues which have to be defined to be prepared for PHP 5. Since > maintaners start working on PHP5 versions of their packages, I guess > it's time to define new standards, reduce and add features to > the PEAR > framework. The list neither complete, but just a collection of what I > found in my mind right now, nor ordered in any way. > > Framework issues: > - PEAR Error can be obsoleted with the use of exceptions > - Features of the Error handling can be rebuild/extended in a > common exception base class > - A great amount of PEAR base class features will be > obsolete (eg. > destructors) > - But there should be a common base class, i guess, to > be able to > implement some additional features (e.g. a common versioning > method, a > common singleton method,...) > > Standard definition issues: > - Codingstandards have to be changed (correct old ones, > add new ones > for new features) > - As we have the chance, a common error standard has to > be defined > (regulation of error codes, for example, i guess error code > definitions > should become a standard in PEAR). > - As there are interfaces available now, I guess we > should add some > templates for common patterns (factory, singleton,...) to the > standards. > > Please try not to let this become another flame war, but add usefull > criticism and feedback. > > Regards, > Toby > > > Pierre-Alain Joye wrote: > > >On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:17:20 +0100 > >Tobias Schlitt <tobias@schlitt.info> wrote: > > > > > > > >>Hi all! > >> > >>I did not find anything real about that on pear-dev and so > for want to > >>ask for the status of this? I guess the PEAR error handling > should be > >>switched to exceptions and stuff. > >> > >> > > > >Exceptions are not errors or should not be used as > PEAR_Error is used > >now, at least in most cases. > > > >I'm not a fan of wide usage of excpetions. That results in a > spagetthi > >mess most of the times ;) > > > >This is something that should be debated :) > > > > > > > >>Is anyone working on that? Are there plans what to do? Have this > >>issues been discussed? > >> > >> > > > >We have got some discussions, no decision or plan yet. > >I'm not sure we should switch quickly with PEAR itself. At > least not in > >the current branch(1.x). I like to see what will really be php5 > >(certainly 5.1) and what is redundant between php5 new features and > >pear. A good example is the Autoloader. > > > >At the same times, a nice redesign will be a good thing. As well as > >some new way to work with the package databases. > > > >pierre > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [PEAR-CORE] PEAR framework changes for PHP5 > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:36:37 +0100 > From: Pierre-Alain Joye <paj@pearfr.org> > Organization: Freelancer > To: Tobias Schlitt <tobias@schlitt.info> > CC: pear-core@lists.php.net > References: <401834F0.9010603@schlitt.info> > > > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:17:20 +0100 > Tobias Schlitt <tobias@schlitt.info> wrote: > > > Hi all! > > > > I did not find anything real about that on pear-dev and so > for want to > > ask for the status of this? I guess the PEAR error handling > should be > > switched to exceptions and stuff. > > Exceptions are not errors or should not be used as PEAR_Error > is used now, at least in most cases. > > I'm not a fan of wide usage of excpetions. That results in a > spagetthi mess most of the times ;) > > This is something that should be debated :) > > > Is anyone working on that? Are there plans what to do? Have this > > issues been discussed? > > We have got some discussions, no decision or plan yet. > I'm not sure we should switch quickly with PEAR itself. At > least not in the current branch(1.x). I like to see what will > really be php5 (certainly 5.1) and what is redundant between > php5 new features and pear. A good example is the Autoloader. > > At the same times, a nice redesign will be a good thing. As > well as some new way to work with the package databases. > > pierre > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >