Re: Standardized way of interpolating variables into PEAR_Exceptionmessages?

On 2006 09 24 23:15, Greg Beaver wrote:

Rather than argue over PEAR_Exception/PEAR_Error/PEAR_ErrorStack, perhaps we could discuss improving the website, and especially the documentation, which is confusing and outdated. Let me be clear though: the work we're all doing on our respective packages is all-important (a la HTML_QuickForm2), I am only suggesting minimally redirecting the energy in this thread to tasks that really need serious attention.

I certainly support that! No small part of my confusion here has been reading documentation that says "use ErrorStack, the replacement for Error", then to discover that there's a decent Exception class AND a class for aggregating warnings, and finally -- through this thread -- discover that there's an RFC that supersedes part of what I've read so far. This has led me to do a bunch of work on ErrorStack that has at best peripheral usefulness, and to finally understand a comment Greg made about PEAR_Warning being potentially more useful. I'm willing to put all of this down to learning curve. Compared to a lot of other OSS projects, PEAR's documentation and web site are stellar. But is it frustrating to discover that what you were attempting to achieve is borderline irrelevant (even if the probability of having it ever be accepted was about 0.05 in the first place).