Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives
| From: | Lukas Kahwe Smith | Date: | Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:59:16 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-47569@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Alexey Borzov wrote:
Hi, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:Usage examples will expect the user to have defined this, just as we expect the include path setting to be setup today. Unit tests always require some sort of setup or runner script. This script can handle this part. Ideally one would be able to run the tests using autoload or allfiles, just to check if its works both ways. regards, LukasOK, how will the usage examples and unit tests access this single __autoload() implementation?The usage examples and unit tests need to load the package classes, you know, as well as dependencies. How are they going to find them?All packages in PEAR will be able to work with a single __autoload() implementation. So I do not see the issue.