That's pretty fair, that last statement... As far as an application is
concerned $o->b doesn't exist because it can't be read.
Seems as though some developers are going to want to know when they've
tried to violate it though... I dunno. Personally I would consider it
error or warning worthy because if I made that mistake I would want to
know about it, rather than never been notified of it.
Is there another class of error that would make more sense? Don't most
people turn off E_NOTICE errors? Perhaps emit an E_STRICT?
On 10/28/2012 8:57 PM, David Muir wrote:
On 29/10/12 03:02, Clint Priest wrote:
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this->b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o->b)) {
/* delete files */
}
echo (int)isset($o->b); /* This should return false and not emit any
sort of warning/notice? */
I mean specifically, there is no getter defined, therefore the result
if isset is indeterminate and while I can see it not causing
execution to stop I don't see it being a good idea to not warn the
developer that what they've attempted is not correct. Without a
getter, isset() is not a legal call (since the value cannot be
retrieved).
I agree with Pierre, isset() should never throw a warning/notice. The
primary use of isset (that I've seen in various code-bases) is to
avoid warnings/notices. Only rarely do I see it used in an expression
to control application logic. The above example should not give a
warning, and should return false. As far as an application is
concerned, $o->b doesn't exist because it can't be read.
David
--
-Clint
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
