2009/8/20 Greg Beaver <g...@chiaraquartet.net>: > Lars Torben Wilson wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Just asking because I've been out of the loop for a while (again) but >> a coworker recently noticed this BC break in func_get_args() and >> friends. While the changes to way func_get_args() do seem necessary >> this should probably still be documented. I just wanted to make sure >> I'm not breaking any current standards too badly with this. :) >> >> I've added similar notes and examples to func-get-arg.xml and >> func-arg-num.xml but have left them out of this email for brevity. >> >> If I don't hear any objections I'll commit tomorrow. Or if I get an OK >> tonight, I'll commit tonight. :) >> >> Comments/fixes of course are welcome. >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Torben >> >> >> Index: reference/funchand/functions/func-get-args.xml >> =================================================================== >> --- reference/funchand/functions/func-get-args.xml (revision 287473) >> +++ reference/funchand/functions/func-get-args.xml (working copy) >> @@ -48,6 +48,15 @@ >> This function can now be used in parameter lists. >> </entry> >> </row> >> + <row> >> + <entry>5.3.0</entry> >> + <entry> >> + If this function is called from the outtermost scope of a file >> + which has been included by calling <function>include</function> >> + or <function>require</function> from within a function in the >> + calling file, now generates a warning and returns &false;. >> + </entry> > > How about: > > "As of PHP version 5.3.0, func_get_args() may no longer be called in > this manner <example>. Output in PHP versions older than 5.3.0: > <output> Output in PHP versions 5.3.0 and newer <output>"
I could get behind something like that for sure. Torben
