Remember, when using require that it is a statement, not a function. It's not necessary to write:
<?php
require('somefile.php');
?>
The following:
<?php
require 'somefile.php';
?>
Is preferred, it will prevent your peers from giving you a hard time and a trivial conversation about what require really is.
require
(PHP 4, PHP 5, PHP 7, PHP 8)
require аналогично include,
за исключением того, что в случае возникновения ошибки он также выдаст фатальную ошибку уровня E_COMPILE_ERROR.
Другими словами, он остановит выполнение скрипта, тогда как
include только выдал бы предупреждение
E_WARNING, которое позволило бы скрипту продолжить выполнение.
Смотрите документацию по include, чтобы узнать как он работает.
add a note
User Contributed Notes 3 notes
chris at chrisstockton dot org ¶
17 years ago
Marcel Baur ¶
3 years ago
If your included file returns a value, you can get it as a result from require(), i.e.
foo.php:
<?php
return "foo";
?>
$bar = require("foo.php");
echo $bar; // equals to "foo"
jave dot web at seznam dot cz ¶
11 months ago
Always use __DIR__ to define path relative to your current __FILE__.
(Or another setting that is originally based on __DIR__/__FILE__)
try & catch - don't get confused by the words "fatal E_COMPILE_ERROR" - it's still just an internal Error that implements Throwable - it can be caught:
<?php
try {
require(__DIR__ . '/something_that_does_not_exist');
} catch (\Throwable $e) {
echo "This was caught: " . $e->getMessage();
}
echo " End of script.";
?>
Note that this will still emit a warning "Failed to open stream: No such file or directory..." ...unless you prefix the require with "@" - which I strongly don't recommend as it would ignore/supress any diagnostic error (unless you have specified set_error_handler()). But even if you'd prefix the require with "@" it would still be caught.
