Lester Caine wrote on 21/11/2014 13:27:
No - There have been several threads on deprecating things that are
currently 'hidden' by e_strict. The confusion is created by having two
incompatible styles of coding, and unless one brings the 'non-e_strict'
code in to line with current practices it creates problems when other
actions change the goal posts yet again.
So, that would be moving from E_STRICT (safe to hide) to E_DEPRECATED (less safe to hide). At that point, you can deal with the E_DEPRECATED notices *and carry on ignoring E_STRICT*.
Unless you can name an example of something which went from E_STRICT to fatal error? If so, that specific case was a violation of process, and should be highlighted.
The confusion is created by having two incompatible styles of coding
I asked this before, and you didn't answer: can you name something which, when you fix the E_STRICT notice, makes your code incompatible with something else? Or something which, if you *ignore* an E_STRICT notice, refuses to work?
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]