Re: Feedback from Drupal

Larry Garfield wrote: > **Exceptions and Exception Handling** > Each package must provide a base exception of the following name: > vendor\package\Exception > > This exception may be either an interface or class (concrete or > abstract). Each exception thrown by "vendor\package" must throw > exceptions that either extend or implement this base exception. > *********************************** > > I've read the follow-ups here, and frankly, um, I still don't get it. Why > must that exist? What's the benefit? Granted I am not working in a heavily OO > and exception-using world, but I still don't understand what the advantage is > here. > > And no mention of naming conventions for exceptions, such as > FooBarBazException? I'd have expected to see that in there. :-) Quick note: it allows a catch-all for a specific 3rd-party package, which can speed safe development: try { $a = new thirdparty\Thingy; $a->doSomething(); $b = new anotherthirdparty\Thingy; $b->doSomething(); } catch (thirdparty\Thingy\Exception $e) { } catch (anotherthirdparty\Thingy\Exception $e) { } otherwise, it can be impossible to know where an exception originates without parsing the error message (nasty yucky). Greg P.S. I think Larry's/Brian's points about procedural standards is reason enough to keep the list open if this will be useful for these projects.