Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives
| From: | Alexey Borzov | Date: | Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:21:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-47542@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi,
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
What are you arguing against? Is having to define that __autoload() function really worth not providing this flexibility?Failure to __autoload() a class always results in a fatal error, exceptions thrown in __autoload() cannot be caught. You didn't provide sample code Philippe asked you about [1] and I suppose that's because you simply can't. While you are busy writing that piece of code, I'd also like to ask you to explain how we are expected to run unit tests on installed PEAR2 packages, since they are not in the include_path anymore. Please provide sample code, I know that you are very good at handwaving. [1] http://news.php.net/php.pear.dev/47529