Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=61747&edit=1

 ID:                 61747
 User updated by:    chealer at gmail dot com
 Reported by:        chealer at gmail dot com
 Summary:            User-defined error handler run despite at sign (@)
                     error control operator
 Status:             Not a bug
 Type:               Bug
 Package:            *General Issues
 PHP Version:        5.4.0
 Block user comment: N
 Private report:     N

 New Comment:

I meant it would be inefficient to ask PHP programmers to include

if (!(error_reporting() & $errno)) {
   // This error code is not included in error_reporting
   return;
}

in all custom error handlers they write, if the problem could be addressed once 
and for all by the PHP interpreter.

If that is your stance though, this requirement should be documented in 
http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/function.set-error-handler.php
And if you really think that custom error handlers should ignore suppressed 
errors, then not calling custom error handlers would be more of a bugfix (for 
those handlers that fail to do it) than a BC break. Certainly, that wouldn't be 
a "major BC break", although it may be disruptive enough to warrant waiting for 
a major release to do such a behavior change.

I'm not saying there's something *wrong* (in the sense of buggy) with the 
current implementation, as long as how it works is documented (which wasn't the 
case until recently), and the requirement to check for suppressed errors is 
documented in set_error_handler()'s documentation (which is still not the case).


Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-16 21:31:03] ras...@php.net

There is nothing inefficient about calling error_reporting(). It is a trivially 
small and fast internal function. And like I said, changing anything here would 
be a major BC break. There is nothing wrong with the current implementation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-16 21:23:27] chealer at gmail dot com

This is a duplicate of #52338.

Note that I partly disagree with the fix. Custom error handlers *can* check 
error_reporting(), as illustrated in the example from 
http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/function.set-error-handler.php

function myErrorHandler($errno, $errstr, $errfile, $errline)
{
    if (!(error_reporting() & $errno)) {
        // This error code is not included in error_reporting
        return;
    }
    [...]
}

However, it would be rather inefficient if custom error handlers *should* (had 
to) do that, in general. If that was the case, PHP should simply not call 
user-defined error handlers when @ was used.
I think user-defined error handlers *should* do something like that, but only 
in some cases.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-16 20:59:18] chealer at gmail dot com

I'm sorry. This was fixed in 
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/phpdoc/en/trunk/language/operators.xml?r1=322134&r2=323370
We now have:

When prepended to an expression in PHP, any error messages that might be 
generated by that expression will be ignored.

If you have set a custom error handler function with set_error_handler() then 
it will still get called, but this custom error handler can (and should) call 
error_reporting() which will return 0 when the call that triggered the error 
was preceded by an @.


Note that this second sentence contradicts the first in some [edge] cases. At 
least, the second sentence should immediately follow the first, rather than 
having its own paragraph.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-16 20:39:54] ras...@php.net

The documentation is quite clear I think. In the first link you provided it 
says:

  If you have set a custom error handler function with set_error_handler() 
  then it will still get called, but this custom error handler can 
  (and should) call error_reporting() which will return 0 when the call 
  that triggered the error was preceded by an @.

I see no reason to change anything here. The current approach gives you all the 
control you need. If you have a custom error handler you can decide whether you 
want to ignore silenced calls or not. Any change to this would also be a major 
BC break.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-16 17:57:52] chealer at gmail dot com

Description:
------------
The at sign operator allows to "ignore" error messages, as explained in 
http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.errorcontrol.php

When prepended to an expression in PHP, any error messages that might be 
generated by that expression will be ignored. 

However, as reported in #61091, user-defined error handlers registered with 
set_error_handler() are nevertheless run when @ is used, which often causes 
such messages to show, as in the below example, where a custom error handler is 
used to customize the display of error messages.

As http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.errorcontrol.php#98895 and 
http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.errorcontrol.php#85042 show, 
this problem is not new. This behavior appears to be by design, and might be 
wanted in some cases.

Therefore, please either:
Stop calling user-defined error handlers when suppressing errors. This needs 
serious consideration for backwards-compatibility.
Allow specifying whether user-defined error handlers should be called when 
suppressing errors.
Make the documentation reflect the current state of things.

Alternatively, if the documentation of the @ operator isn't amended because 
custom error handlers are considered a corner case, then the 
set_error_handler() documentation should warn developers tempted to use custom 
error handlers that they are non-standard, not recommended/supported, and try 
to explain the pitfalls. In short, tell developers they should only use a 
custom error handler if they know what they're doing.

However, this alternative should be avoided since set_error_handler() is 
already used in several applications whose developers didn't receive the 
warning.

Test script:
---------------
<?php

function myErrorHandler($errno, $errstr) {
    switch ($errno) {
    case E_USER_ERROR:
        echo "<b>My ERROR</b> [$errno] $errstr<br />\n";
        echo "  Fatal error on line $errline in file $errfile";
        echo ", PHP " . PHP_VERSION . " (" . PHP_OS . ")<br />\n";
        echo "Aborting...<br />\n";
        exit(1);
        break;

    case E_USER_WARNING:
        echo "<b>My WARNING</b> [$errno] $errstr<br />\n";
        break;

    case E_USER_NOTICE:
        echo "<b>My NOTICE</b> [$errno] $errstr<br />\n";
        break;

    default:
        echo "Unknown error type: [$errno] $errstr<br />\n";
        break;
    }
}

// function to test the error handling
function scale_by_log($vect, $scale)
{
    if (!is_numeric($scale) || $scale <= 0) {
        trigger_error("log(x) for x <= 0 is undefined, you used: scale = 
$scale", E_USER_ERROR);
    }

    if (!is_array($vect)) {
        trigger_error("Incorrect input vector, array of values expected", 
E_USER_WARNING);
        return null;
    }

    $temp = array();
    foreach($vect as $pos => $value) {
        if (!is_numeric($value)) {
            trigger_error("Value at position $pos is not a number, using 0 
(zero)", E_USER_NOTICE);
            $value = 0;
        }
        $temp[$pos] = log($scale) * $value;
    }

    return $temp;
}

$a = array(2, 3, "foo", 5.5, 43.3, 21.11);


/* Value at position $pos is not a number, using 0 (zero) */
scale_by_log($a, M_PI);
@scale_by_log($a, M_PI);

set_error_handler("myErrorHandler");
@scale_by_log($a, M_PI);

?>


Expected result:
----------------
Notice: Value at position 2 is not a number, using 0 (zero) in 
/var/www/atoperator.php on line 42

Call Stack:
    0.0005     339192   1. {main}() /var/www/atoperator.php:0
    0.0005     339836   2. scale_by_log(array (0 => 2, 1 => 3, 2 => 'foo', 3 => 
5.5, 4 => 43.3, 5 => 21.11), 3.1415926535898) /var/www/atoperator.php:55
    0.0006     340648   3. trigger_error('Value at position 2 is not a number, 
using 0 (zero)', 1024) /var/www/atoperator.php:42

Actual result:
--------------
Notice: Value at position 2 is not a number, using 0 (zero) in 
/var/www/atoperator.php on line 42

Call Stack:
    0.0005     339192   1. {main}() /var/www/atoperator.php:0
    0.0005     339836   2. scale_by_log(array (0 => 2, 1 => 3, 2 => 'foo', 3 => 
5.5, 4 => 43.3, 5 => 21.11), 3.1415926535898) /var/www/atoperator.php:55
    0.0006     340648   3. trigger_error('Value at position 2 is not a number, 
using 0 (zero)', 1024) /var/www/atoperator.php:42

<b>My NOTICE</b> [1024] Value at position 2 is not a number, using 0 (zero)<br 
/>


------------------------------------------------------------------------



-- 
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=61747&edit=1

Reply via email to