At 02:39 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Stig S. Bakken wrote: >On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 14:30, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > At 02:20 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Stig S. Bakken wrote: > > >On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 14:14, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > > > At 01:42 PM 2/8/2002 +0100, Stig S. Bakken wrote: > > > > >On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 13:38, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > > > > > Andi Gutmans wrote: > > > > > > > At 09:20 PM 2/8/2002 +0900, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Andi Gutmans wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>> Name space BC problem is "bad", since script may misbehave > > > > > > >>>> without proper error message where to fix. > > > > > > >>>> It's a bad BC problem since it's harder to fix/notice. > > > > > > >>>> In some cases, it seems works well while it's not. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> The question is how often does this breakage actually > happen in > > > real > > > > > > >>> life and not theoretically on the mailing list. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Then we have different priority for BC problems :( > > > > > > >> BC _with_ error is not as bad as BC _without_ error for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Theoretically I agree but if BC _without_ error happens very > > > rarely then > > > > > > > I don't think it's that bad. In any case, we could always have an > > > > > > > E_MIGRATION for people migrating. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great! > > > > > > I personally prefer to have E_DEBUG, E_INFO and clean up error > > > > > > level for functions. There about 2300 php_error/zend_error :) > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll happily contribute for it. > > > > > > > > > > > > E_INFO: > > > > > > Error like compatibility info (migration) > > > > > > E_DEBUG: > > > > > > Error useful for debugging script but not appropriate > > > > > > for production scripts. > > > > > > E_NOTICE > > > > > > Error that can be a bug in script but may be ingored. > > > > > > E_WARNING > > > > > > Error taht cannot be ignored. (Error must be handled) > > > > > > E_ERROR > > > > > > Fatal error. > > > > > > > > > >Good idea. E_DEBUG may be a good alternative to php_printf(). Heh. > > > > > > > > Fine tuning errors is probably a good idea. E_PEDANTIC? > > > > > >A lot of errors that are E_NOTICE today would definitely be better off > > >as E_PEDANTIC. Undefined array indexes come to mind. What else? > > >E_INFO may be a bit vague (and probably attract a lot of "misc" > > >errors). What about E_COMPAT for compatibility issues? > > > > E_PENDATIC, E_COMPAT, E_NOTICE, E_WARNING, E_ERROR > > Do you see E_PENDANTIC and E_NOTICE as much different? Can we > differentiate > > between them? > >Well, E_PENDANTIC is more specific, its use should be limited to really >strict warnings, just like in C compilers. Just move those errors from >E_NOTICE to E_PEDANTIC and leave the remaining E_NOTICEs as they are. >Or are you saying you see less point in having E_NOTICE with E_PEDANTIC?
Yeah that's what I meant but I think you're right. We can use E_PENDATIC for *really* pedantic messages. It'd be actually interesting to find all sorts of places which could do with this. Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
