Re[10]: More accurate compiled file names

>> AD> Well, the most bad thing imho - it's to make developer
>> AD> to look into compiled templates.
>> AD> That's what I'm talking about.
>> Agree.  But  WHO  makes  (makes!) developer to look into compiled
>> code? Please stick a finger to them.
AD> We should give deleloper possibility to forget about compiled
AD> templates  at all.
Unfortunately it is impossible (at least before PHP's eval is not
grown up from the baby pants).

AD> And  you  (finger's on you, yeah) are trying to align machine
AD> code.
Oh,  really? (-; I just align compiled template FILENAMES in this
thread, not a machine code.

AD> I'm  trying  to  explain  you,  that  there  can be much more
AD> convinient  ways  to  debug  templates,  then  using compiled
AD> templates for that. Got it?
Of course, I agree with it from the beginning. But stop, have you
read  the  neighbour thread? I am writing there about line number
synchronization.

>> Text "generated for machine and for machine" could be readable by
>> human  too.  And  if  I should not pay for that and even must not
>> loot at them more often than before, why not?
AD> Could != Should 
AD> I could jump off the roof, but should I ?
But  what  would  you  say  if  the  President  modify the law to
prohibit roofjumping for all the people in the world? It's silly.
(-;

I  just  want  to say, that if we can do something better with no
pay  for  it  (at  all - no pay!), but with possible benefits, we
should do it.

>> But  I do not like to cry tearing my hears when I cannot find the
>> buggy template much more. So I choose to dig instead of tear. (-;
AD> Ok,  let's  stop here. Imagine such situation: Smarty handles
AD> most of possible errors correctly. And you don't have to look
AD> into compiled code to learn what happened. Is there some real
AD> need to dig compiled templates?
No.  But  there  is REAL need to detect full source template name
(no  any  words  about  compiled  code at all, eh?) on unexpected
fatal error.

>> AD> Just  think  about it - your templates with lots of empty() &
>> AD> isset() will be really pain in the ass.
>> Agree.  But E_NOTICE is not just a lot of isset(). You are mixing
>> three  independent  entities in your mind - the error itself, the
>> error diagnostic message and tools to handle errors. No good.
AD> no error -> no message -> no need to handle
"Every program has at least one error."
(seems, Knuth).

You may disable message, but you cannot disable error.

>> And  one  more. E_NOTICE is not the only message which is handled
>> at  runtime.  We  also have E_WARNING. Do you offer to disable it
>> too?
AD> That's what I'm trying to say! Smarty should handle correctly
AD> such situations (if it can do so, of course).
Smarty  should  make  all  the people in the world happy! Please,
modify its code to achieve this. (-;

>> What  about  code  which  is called from inside the template (for
>> example, user-defined functions)? If I disable E_NOTICE, it would
>> be disabled in these functions too.
AD> Well,  I'm  really tired to repeat things twice and more, but
AD> I'll  do  it  for you: Smarty knows only about templates. And
AD> we're talking about errors in templates. Please, forget about
AD> {insert}'s and {php}'s - Smarty can do nothing with them.
Thanks. (-;

>> Sorry of my question, but how long do your programming in PHP and
>> use Smarty (approximately)?
AD> Rather strange question. Especially for you imho.
AD> PHP - more than 4 years.
AD> Smarty - about 2.
AD> Are you satisfied ?
Not  satisfied - just astonished. (-; And all this four years you
programming  without  E_NOTICE  and do not differ error and error
message? Strange.
 
>> AD> but we can TRY to handle most of them.
>> AD> Btw, why you're changing examples all the time?
>> To  motivate  why  do  we  need human-readable NAMES for compiled
>> template filenames.
AD> Ah. And I thought you're just don't know what you really want.
AD> I was wrong, probably.
Maybe  I  don't  know that I want, but I have a patch which works
and which is very useful in practical situations. (-;

>> AD> Because you're trying to make easier the process I don't want at
>> AD> all. When your C program fails - are you digging the machine
>> AD> code or maybe starting up a debugger?
>> If  somebody would write a debugger for Smarty, I will use it, of
>> course. (-;
AD> Maybe you need to read this:
AD> http://smarty.php.net/manual/en/chapter.debugging.console.php
How  do you plan to use debugging console on E_ERROR raising?
I can use C debugger (gdb, for example) to debug crushed program.
 
>> And  -  why  are you talking about "machine code"? Where is it? I
>> have  only  said about FILENAMES - to simplify detection of buggy
>> SOURCE  template,  NOT  machine code. I must not to open compiled
>> template  at  all  - I will be satisfied only for its name in PHP
>> fatal  error  message. Then I will go directly to SOURCE template
>> and  correct  it  (line  number  I  already  have - see neighbour
>> thread).
AD> So, this letter was just my imagination:
AD> http://lists.php.net/article.php?group=php.smarty.dev&article=2319 ?
And?  Working  with  source  template,  not compiled, when we got
error  message  (E_ERROR or E_WARNING - no matter). The letter is
about that. (Glad to see that you have read this.)

-- 
Best regards,
  Dmitry Koteroff.

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