Re: PEAR-wide code quality issue (fix proposal for possible class redeclare errors)

Hello, well, if you use a system with highly dynamic or even self-learning path generation and discovery, the described situation with doubled require_once for the same file could become an unpredictable case. What are the real backdrawals of my proposal (to enclose class definitions into an if-clause, preventing fatal error on double definition if occured)? cheers, Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pierre" <pierre.php@gmail.com> To: "peter fiksman" <pfiksman@gmx.net> Cc: <pear-dev@lists.php.net> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 12:03 AM Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] PEAR-wide code quality issue (fix proposal for possible class redeclare errors) > On 7/15/06, peter fiksman <pfiksman@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > hearing all those irritated voices I still dare to ask... > > > > why can't be ALL classes defined like: > > > > ================================ > > > > if ( !class_exists( "SOME_Package_And_Class_Name" ) ) { > > > > class SOME_Package_And_Class_Name > > { > > // code > > } > > > > } > > ================================ > > > > I have got some "cannot redeclare" issues with autoloading classes and this > > was a really helpful fix (to PEAR classes...) > > > > If this is not dangerous at all (or is it?) maybe it could be possible to > > patch PEAR classes in this way. > > Just preventing the redeclare fatal error? > > use require/include_once > > Cheers, > --Pierre > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >