Re: Re: E_STRICT

MFriedman@symcor.com wrote:

For whatever it is worth, I just wanted to add that I always code with E_ALL using php4 and plan to code with E_STRICT on php5. If a PEAR package didn't conform to E_STRICT I would be prevented from using the package, or prevented from using E_STRICT; neither option is good.

Well for the interim period I think its very unfeasible to code entire applications in E_STRICT. For the most part applications which work and are designed perfectly fine will fail under E_STRICT because they still use "var". However I do think that for php5 only packages it makes sense to start them off as E_STRICT otherwise we will waste alot of time before anyone can seriously start using E_STRICT inside their application. Therefore I think any infrastructure code we provide (let alone require) should be available in an E_STRICT version. However as I have said I am very much opposed to forking off PHP4 packages without doing any structural changes which are incompatible with PHP4 just for the sake of E_STRICT compliance. IMHO E_STRICT is useful, but not that useful. Its main job is to prevent sloppy programming, which we dont allow in PEAR anyways. It also serves to push people away from deprecated methods. However while I see some value in that it makes no sense for a library as PEAR since our goal must be to support a reasonably large array of php versions. And forking off packages (note: a new major version is effectly a fork) to support this large array of php versions is asking for trouble. So to conclude I still think that PHP5 only packages should be E_STRICT, but I also think that E_STRICT compliance alone is no reason to fork off a package. regards, Lukas