Re: [PEPr] 0 for RFC::Error Handling Guidelines for PHP5 packages

Pepr wrote:

Greg Beaver (http://pear.php.net/user/cellog) has voted 0 on the proposal for RFC::Error Handling Guidelines for PHP5 packages. Proposal information: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132 Vote information: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-vote-show.php?id=132&handle=cellog Comment: I don't disagree with the RFC, but it does not go into any detail on naming conventions or other crucial details (how to handle warnings, etc.) that are discussed in the wiki. If there is a future RFC that will cover these details, that is great, otherwise I am -1

Warning treatment omission was deliberate. Warnings are not errors. Namely, with Exceptions, Warnings differ by not interrupting program flow. Being completely different, they deserve to be discussed somewhere else. Discussing them here would only make it difficult to keep the focus. This RFC limits the scope to errors, clearly defining what is an error. It can be discussed and evaluated without starting the discussion about warning treatment. An RFC on Warnings should follow. However, it needs an accompanying PEAR_Warning package, so it won't be me pushing the PHP Warning treatment RFC out. I do think it should exist, but I won't personally guarantee it *will* exist. About naming conventions, there is a section on exception hierarchies. The naming follows directly from the hierarchy, and the coding guidelines already cover that ground. Do you think anything is missing? Cheers, Sérgio

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] OpenPGP digital signature signature.asc