| Is there any situation where anything other than require_once is better? [message #171923] |
Fri, 21 January 2011 16:51  |
Leonardo Azpurua
Messages: 46
Registered: December 2010
Karma:
|
Member |
|
|
Hi,
I have so far used "include" (coming from "C", I just saw it and
understood it).
Then I read about "require" and "require_once."
Ok. I understand that there might be some situations where not being
able to reach a particular file might not hinder the execution of an
applicaton (thus rationalizing the existence of "include"), but I hope
that will never be my case.
So I will rely on "require" over "include".
So far (I am absolutely new to PHP) I have written reusable functions
that are stored in files in the include folder, and have not needed to
nest inclusions.
But now I am going to start coding classes, and if they are going to
be completely context independent, they must declare their own
dependencies as "require" statements.
And I guess "require_once" is the natural choice for this situation.
Since I care a lot about simplicity, and lexical simpicity is achieved
by a vocabulary as reduced as possible, I am about to forget the
existence of "include", "include_once" and "require".
Is there any chance that such voluntary oblivion will get me into
trouble later (except for the chance to flunk in a certification test
that I will never take)?
Thanks.
--
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]