On Monday, July 9, 2001, at 09:42 PM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> At 04:04 PM 7/9/2001 -0500, Brian Moon wrote:
>> It is not so much BC. It is more like unexpected new behavior.
>> As of now, a bad programmer might have this:
>> /www/site.com/include/file.php
>> /www/site.com/include/config.php
>> /ww
> I guess what I meant was [Relative] in the sense that it is forced to be
> relative to the CURRENT file, vs being relative to the "main" script. You
> can call it a bug -- but I would disagree - I feel that the purpose of
> include is to pull utility code into a "main" script.
It is a bug,
> Although for newer users, you guys are probably very right. Makes things
> much easier when learning. So I guess as long as it doesn't add to
> ambiguity (would there be include_relative() or include($FilePath[,boolean
> relative])... could be useful.
Includes without an absolute path are
+1
On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I think one thing that bothers PHP developers is when they do:
> include "../foo.inc";
> and in foo.inc they do:
> include "bar.inc";
>
> That bar.inc is not searched for in foo.inc's current directory
> automatically. As we pretty much al
