Hi!
I foresee a fair number of people who turn on error_mask, and then are defuddled by the 3rd party apps they never reviewed in the first place not behaving.
/.../ > All that said: > I am in favor of this patch, provided sufficient effort to be sure the > community knows, in advance, loud and clear, it's not a cure-all and > is meant only for code that can't/won't be fixed, rather than code > that is in active development.
As I already noted, the masking - in most cases and definitely in recommended cases - would happen for errors that are NOT SEEN. Not reported. Not logged. Before the patch. Which means, whatever advantage you seek from looking at these errors, fixing them, reviewing the code, doing anything related to them at all, etc., etc. - you have ALREADY lost if when you decided not to report these errors. Without the patch. Before the patch. So all arguments about how wrong it is to disable errors when errors in fact might be useful are, again, irrelevant - they are already disabled without the patch. So far, the argument that made the most sense on this topic is that using this patch would taint you with "bad mojo", I guess because when you sacrifice some performance to the Gods of Unreported Errors, it's all OK, but without that sacrifice, they could become enraged and revenge you by... I don't know, giving you more bad mojo?
-- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect s...@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: s...@zend.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
