Re: Why change require_once? A brief explanation of motives
| From: | Lukas Kahwe Smith | Date: | Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:01:34 +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-47595@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
[09:58] <lsmith> Derick: are there any known issues with xdebug and __autoload()? [09:58] <@Derick> lsmith: no BTW: I have been using symfony (which uses __autoload()) along side Xdebug since November. I have also done cachegrind analysis and step by step debugging. I never ran into any issues besides the fact that symfony abuses Exceptions for control flow, but thats not related to __autoload(). regards, Lukas2) As with everything *magic* and *convenient*, the drawback of autoload is usually the resulting nightmare when debugging code, and can create a lot of WTF factors. IIRC someone mention something not working with XDebug. How will this be addressed?Yeah, I agree that its magical, however instead of grepping for require_once calls, I guess you now need to grep for "new foobar" or just "foobar" aka the class name. I did not catch the thing about xdebug, I will ask Derick about this.