I'm not a developer of php, but developing in php, i can say that it'd
be nice to be able to filter *any* data, *if I want to*, not just $_GET,
$_POST etc.. I think it is a good idea to have a easy to use filter api,
but please don't make it an ini setting, so i have to call a function to
get t
Sara Golemon wrote:
You won't hear a lot of argument from me. I just care less that it is the
way it is.
-Sara
:p. Ok, probably there will be some redesign when PHP 6 is on it's way,
perhaps not. :) Anyway, thanks for your time. ;)
Michael
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing Li
Terje Slettebø wrote:
I have also very little belief of it ever getting into PHP, judging from the
discussion.
Perhaps it will in PHP 12.0, perhaps never. Point is, that noone is
willing to give any reasons, because they all seem to agree, that at the
current point, they don't want it in. Perhaps
ok, i see. But why does it work with variables that are set as global,
e.g. the $HTTP_*_VARS:
this works inside a function. is it because of the global keyword? If
so, why can't there be a "magic" "global $_GET, $_POST, $_SESSION ..."
set in every function, for every superglobal, instead of th
Sara Golemon wrote:
> Index: Zend/zend_execute.c
> ===
> RCS file: /repository/ZendEngine2/zend_execute.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.692
> diff -u -r1.692 zend_execute.c
> --- Zend/zend_execute.c 22 Jan 2005 02:29:18 - 1.692
>
Atm it isn't possible to use a construct like $var = ${'_GET'}; inside a
function or method. Will this behaviour change in future versions of
PHP? I think it is somehow odd and inconsistent to not be able to use
the superglobals that way, while it is possible outside of functions and
methods an
one thing though. Will this behaviour change in future versions?
I think it is somehow odd and inconsistent to not be able to use them
with variable variables inside functions and methods. It's an
unnecessary restriction and will keep ppl using the old $HTTP_*_VARS. I
also see no reason for it t
yep, figured it out already. Problem is the german version of the
manual. It is wrong and doesn't say anything about functions and
methods. It simply says you can't use superglobals for variable variable
and uses a illogical example ${$_GET}, whatever that should mean ;). The
english manual is
in functions or class methods."
i tested it and it is true, you can't used it inside functions, because
the variable would not reference to the superglobal variable this way.
test();
?>
the output is
NULL
Anyway, thanks for your time. ;)
Regards, Michael
Michael Virnstein wrote:
st"]=>
string(5) "works"
}
Andi Gutmans wrote:
The idea is that the following doesn't work by design:
$a = "_GET";
var_dump($$a);
At 11:31 PM 1/28/2005 +0100, Michael Virnstein wrote:
Hi PHP-Devs,
i don't know if it is a bug or a new feature of php5. The php man
Hi PHP-Devs,
i don't know if it is a bug or a new feature of php5. The php manual
says, that using superglobals for variable variables isn't working, so
something like this shouldn't work:
$a = 'hello world';
echo ${$_GET['test']};
?>
Actually it does work. Is this intended now? Would be nice,
>
> You mean like an interface adds abstract to all functoins...
exactly. needless to say, that the variable $this would not be available in those
classes and that subclasses of that class have to be static also. what i'm not sure
about is, if it would be better to let ppl type static on the
> 1. static classes:
> static classes can only contain static methods and attributes
>
what would be even easier than the above:
if a class is declared "static" or "final static", the attributes and
methods in that function are static by default, so you don't need to
type static on every method a
> Ah so it is just a little bit more enforcement then the following:
>
> final class DB
> {
> // prevent instantiation
> private function __construct() { exit(0); }
>
> // The following is not needed because the constructor cannot be
called
> // private function __clone() { exit(0)
> > 2. final classes:
> > final classes can't be extended
>
> already supported
Cannot find it in the docs.
http://www.php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.final.php doesn't seem to have
any comments on that.
I'm not at home at the moment, so i couldn't try, but are you really sure
that final CLASSES
things i'd like to add:
4. abstract classes can be defined static also
this means that all subclasses of foo must also be static and can only
contain static methods and attributes
5. abstract classes can't be defined final
Regards, Michael
Michael Virnstein wrote:
Hi Devs,
what woul
ules, which is not a bad thing.
Michael
Christian Schneider wrote:
Michael Virnstein wrote:
What do you think about it?
PINJ (PHP Is Not Java) ;-)
Let's keep the language simple, too much was added already IMHO (-:C
- Chris
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi Devs,
what would probably be a nice addition:
1. static classes:
static classes can only contain static methods and attributes
2. final classes:
final classes can't be extended
final class foo {
public function bar() {}
}
3. final static classes
final static classes can only contain sta
Hi there,
what really would be nice, if PHP would have a more advanced way of
quoting strings similar to Perl. E.g. the q{} and qq{} function are
really helpful there or that i can use e.g. $var = !my string 'hallo'!;
and i don't have to backslash ' and " inside the string.
another thing that i
19 matches
Mail list logo
