[MediaWiki-l] When loading extensions is require_once or include_once preferred?

Mark A. Hershberger mah at nichework.com
Thu Nov 6 22:34:21 UTC 2014


Chris Koerner <nobelx at gmail.com> 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




More information about the MediaWiki-l mailing list