I dont know if you read the blog comments here: http://www.akbkhome.com/blog.php/View/79/require_once+is+part+of+your +documentation..html and here http://www.akbkhome.com/blog.php/View/77/is+__autoload+evil%3F.html
and slightly related http://www.akbkhome.com/blog.php/View/76/require_once%2C+one +optimization+too+many%3F.html
It's pretty clear that people want to use autoload to save them having to deal with include paths.. (and perhaps save a few stat calls) - the more straightforward solution would be to add a include/require callback handler - so that rather than a class instantation action, magically doing file operations, you had a simpler and more obvious way to manage inclusions.
But I guess Until I bother hacking something up for it, it'll remain little more than another heckle from the audience. ;)
Frameworks should provide __autoload() helper methods, but should never implement the function itself. Its upto the enduser to do this. This is the only way it makes sense. Otherwise most of Alan's horror scenarios actually come true. The cleanest way indeed is to be able to set the function name for autoloading as a callback. We we have this now via spl. So I dont see a point messing with it and thereby making this tool unmaintainable and totaly inconsistent with the reset of the language. I can already see it .. in 5 years there will be books on php __autoload().
regards, Lukas
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
