Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives

From: Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:57:15 +0000
Subject: Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-47589@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Alexey Borzov wrote:
Hi, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Well, except for the the fact that AllTests.php won't know where to find those classes, nothing.
You can test them by setting up your include path like always and using __autoload() or by using allfiles.php. Both can be written out once in your AllTests.php and never be touched again.
Oookay, so to run usage examples and unit tests one will still have to set up include_path. Thus everything said before about getting rid of that horrible chore is complete and utter bullshit. Case dismissed, I suppose?
No, alternatively you can setup your allfiles to use the proper relative/absolute path. Or you can setup your include_path. Surprise, all the options of this new proposal are available for people just as always. But yeah, I do not really follow the include_path is hard for developers argument. I do know for a fact that some people run into include_path setting issue with their hosters, but then again I do not follow pear-general in quite some time. Maybe hosters have gotten smarter these days. Alexey, this is getting quite boring, but I guess for you your mind is already made up, so you can just make your attacks and hope that "reasonable doubt" will be enough to stop this proposal. I guess you have stopped trying to expose real issues in the proposals and are now just trying to control public opinion. regards, Lukas

« previous php.pear.dev (#47589) next »