Chris Koerner <[email protected]> writes: > From http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_includes.asp
Please don't use W3Schools for PHP information. Information on any PHP keyword can be found by typing "http://php.net/KEYWORD"; into your browser's URL bar. For example, http://php.net/require takes you to a page that clearly explains the difference between the two: require is identical to include except upon failure it will also produce a fatal E_COMPILE_ERROR level error. In other words, it will halt the script whereas include only emits a warning (E_WARNING) which allows the script to continue. > In the general scheme of things, is one a better practice over the other? On my sites, I like to know as soon as possible if there is a problem. require() will give an error if a file doesn't exist instead of trying to continue. If a site continues to operate with missing files, you'll probably end up with errors that are harder to diagnose than they need to be. Mark. -- Mark A. Hershberger NicheWork LLC 717-271-1084 _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list To unsubscribe, go to: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
