Posted by Geoff Berrow on 04/21/07 08:06

Message-ID: <xCdWh.4769$Ro3.262@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk> from cluthz
contained the following:

>> It's hard to say out of context. Notices do not necessarily mean the
>> code will not run or that it will be buggy. But it's not good practice.
>
>
>Is it possible that the errors starting occurring when ASP.net was activated
>on an account. If this question is too vague without knowing more context
>don't worry, but apparently these warning started occurring after ASP was
>activated for another reason.

Can't imagine why that would make a difference.

Back to your original point, the solution to the problem is not to
change the default level of error reporting in any case. This does not
make for portable code. If the notices are not important the developers
can easily suppress them. But given the nature of the advice they have
offered I'd be getting more than a little worried by now.

--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

• Next in forum: Re: best practices confusion between framework v.templating ?
• Prev in forum: Inserting only new RSS items into a database
• Thread view: Re: "Notice: Undefined ..." - Ok to turn off / ignore these notices?

[Reply to this message]