usage of PEAR_Exception

Hi,

what is the general agreement on PEAR_Exception (I don't
mean general
usage)? Should you extend PEAR_Exception class and create
Package_Name_Exception, or is this up to one's personal
preference?

Personally, I support the extension since it allows you a
more
specific try/catch later on.

Cheers,
Till

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

till wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> what is the general agreement on PEAR_Exception (I
don't mean general
> usage)? Should you extend PEAR_Exception class and
create
> Package_Name_Exception, or is this up to one's personal
preference?

Yes you are supposed to extend from PEAR_Exeception. IIRC
the RFC even 
mandated that every package throw its own exception that
extends from 
PEAR_Exception so that users can differentiate from what
layer the 
exception originated from.

Look at the exception RFC in PEPr.

regards,
Lukas

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

--On May 2, 2007 6:25:36 AM -0700 Lukas Kahwe Smith
<mlspooteeweet.org>
wrote:

> Look at the exception RFC in PEPr.

?

better yet, simply refer to the CS
<http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.errors.php>


Maybe I need more coffee, but
the "Error Handling Guidlines for PHP5 package"
RFC has no content
<http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132
>

so although the CS is the place to look, the PEPr RFC seems
to not be
available for historical reference...

-c

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Le 2 mai 07 à 15:39, Craig Constantine a écrit :

> --On May 2, 2007 6:25:36 AM -0700 Lukas Kahwe Smith  
> <mlspooteeweet.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Look at the exception RFC in PEPr.
>
> ?
>
> better yet, simply refer to the CS
> <http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.errors.php>

>
> Maybe I need more coffee, but
> the "Error Handling Guidlines for PHP5
package" RFC has no content
> <http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132
>
>
> so although the CS is the place to look, the PEPr RFC
seems to not be
> available for historical reference...

Yes, apparently someone removed the page where initial
proposals were  
posted.
The same happened to my Net_URL_Mapper proposal where I gave
usage  
examples.
It would be nice if this could go back to normal.
Thanks,


--
Bertrand Mansion
Mamasam
Work : http://www.mamasam.com
Blog : http://golgote.freeflux.n
et

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Bertrand Mansion wrote:
> 
> Le 2 mai 07 à 15:39, Craig Constantine a écrit :
> 
>> --On May 2, 2007 6:25:36 AM -0700 Lukas Kahwe Smith
<mlspooteeweet.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Look at the exception RFC in PEPr.
>>
>> ?
>>
>> better yet, simply refer to the CS
>> <http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.errors.php>

>>
>> Maybe I need more coffee, but
>> the "Error Handling Guidlines for PHP5
package" RFC has no content
>> <http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132
>
>>
>> so although the CS is the place to look, the PEPr
RFC seems to not be
>> available for historical reference...
> 
> Yes, apparently someone removed the page where initial
proposals were
> posted.
> The same happened to my Net_URL_Mapper proposal where I
gave usage
> examples.
> It would be nice if this could go back to normal.
> Thanks,

I cannot help wandering how that happened.

Arnaud.

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 5/2/07, Craig Constantine <craigblkbx.com> wrote:
> --On May 2, 2007 6:25:36 AM -0700 Lukas Kahwe Smith
<mlspooteeweet.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Look at the exception RFC in PEPr.
>
> ?
>
> better yet, simply refer to the CS
> <http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.errors.php>


Yeah, "Exception class hierarchies" - thanks! I
didn't see this when I
scanned the page.

> Maybe I need more coffee, but
> the "Error Handling Guidlines for PHP5
package" RFC has no content
> <http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132
>
>
> so although the CS is the place to look, the PEPr RFC
seems to not be
> available for historical reference...

It seems that when you don't have those bookmarked, it's
hard to find
any docs referencing the usage, also [ my weak attempt here
to shift
the blame :-D ] in regard to Services_Digg's use of
PEAR_Exception, I
thought I'd ask. 

Thanks!
Till

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> It seems that when you don't have those bookmarked,
it's hard to find
> any docs referencing the usage, also [ my weak attempt
here to shift
> the blame :-D ] in regard to Services_Digg's use of
PEAR_Exception, I
> thought I'd ask. 

I was unaware of the RFC. I'll fix this before I release
0.1.0. The  
RFC makes sense and I definitely +1 it. I also agree they're
hard to  
find. As are the elections.

- --Joe


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGOL9Ih0MUGpYY9OQRAoWEAJ9fUx76IdLZnmR8hZZlQ7+PGdkuGgCd
GZ/F
hhyRmIiikwxewoD0RFqUd/c=
=l3W/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Hi,

Bertrand Mansion wrote:
> Le 2 mai 07 à 15:39, Craig Constantine a écrit :
>> Maybe I need more coffee, but
>> the "Error Handling Guidlines for PHP5
package" RFC has no content
>> <http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132
>
>>
>> so although the CS is the place to look, the PEPr
RFC seems to not be
>> available for historical reference...
> 
> Yes, apparently someone removed the page where initial
proposals were  
> posted.
> The same happened to my Net_URL_Mapper proposal where I
gave usage  
> examples.
> It would be nice if this could go back to normal.

For the case that the RFC isn't in the database anymore, the
last
version of that page can be found here:
http://web.archi
ve.org/web/20051223235232/http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-prop
osal-show.php?id=132

Instead of hiding these RFCs in PEPr, we should add them in
shortened
versions to the manual.

The Net_URL_Mapper proposal isn't archived on
web.archive.org.

Regards,
Mark

-- 
http://www.markwiesemann.
eu

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

--On May 2, 2007 8:39:36 PM +0200 Mark Wiesemann
<wiesemannphp.net> wrote:

> Instead of hiding these RFCs in PEPr, we should add
them in shortened
> versions to the manual.

or just immortalize them in an RFC section of the web
site...

moving them into the manual (as I understand it) requires a
little more
effort for someone.

-c

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Hi,

Craig Constantine wrote:
> --On May 2, 2007 8:39:36 PM +0200 Mark Wiesemann
<wiesemannphp.net> wrote:
> 
>> Instead of hiding these RFCs in PEPr, we should add
them in shortened
>> versions to the manual.
> 
> or just immortalize them in an RFC section of the web
site...

Such a section would also be fine, yes.

> moving them into the manual (as I understand it)
requires a little more
> effort for someone.

Such a move would have the benefit that somebody could
review and 
summarize the RFCs. Too long texts have the risk that nobody
will read 
them.

Regards,
Mark

-- 
http://www.markwiesemann.
eu

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php