Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives
| From: | Bertrand Mansion | Date: | Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:36:39 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-47584@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Le 17 juil. 07 à 16:57, Lukas Kahwe Smith a écrit :
Alexey Borzov wrote:What if the admin is asleep when the SMS is sent ? I bet he is going to be mad ! -- Bertrand Mansion Mamasam Work : http://www.mamasam.com Blog : http://golgote.freeflux.netHi, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:Err, a require_once that fails to load the code is also fatal .. calling a class thats missing will lead to a fatal error .. unless you use autoload, which gives you the _option_ to write the class on the fly, catch the exception, send an sms to the admin and give a nice error message to the user. sounds like a feature to me.another example would be preventing fatal errors by creating classes on the fly.You mean, the same fatal errors that are *introduced* by using autoload? That's a huge improvement, indeed!