Hello Andrew,
if we go the array_get() route as a short half solution to hopefully make
a lot of people happy (at least it would serve $_GET/_REQUEST etc needs).
Then I think we should make it a bit more useable:
Get the default or the multilevel subscription of $ar
proto mixed array_get(array
On 9/13/07, Peter Brodersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not too fond of a function that begins with if* - it might
> misdirect people to think it's a control structure.
ifsetor was not a function (like isset).
--Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:25:39 +0200, in php.internals
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lukas Kahwe Smith) wrote:
>Aside from lack of BC hacks what is the issue? I remember some fussing
>about the name, but I find this a joke of an argument. You cant get much
>clearer a name than ifsetor().
just my opinio
On Sep 12, 2007, at 2:25 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Andrew Shearer wrote:
Meanwhile, array_get() provides the most-needed functionality
while avoiding
the issues that prevented ifsetor's acceptance.
Aside from lack of BC hacks what is the issue? I remember some
fussing about the name,
Andrew Shearer wrote:
Meanwhile, array_get() provides the most-needed functionality while avoiding
the issues that prevented ifsetor's acceptance.
Aside from lack of BC hacks what is the issue? I remember some fussing
about the name, but I find this a joke of an argument. You cant get much
c
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 13:53 -0400, Andrew Shearer wrote:
>
>
> Here is the patch and unit test file for array_get():
>
> http://ashearer.com/software/array_get/2007-09-10-php6/array_get.diff
> http://ashearer.com/software/array_get/2007-09-10-php6/array_get.phpt
>
>
> And here is the backward c
On 9/12/07, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Robert,
>
> yeah ifsetor if much better than the @-?: combination. But for 5.3 that
> would be all we could do. For 6 and in the long run we might do a real
> ifsetor. If ever we could come to a consensus... and no i don't really
> l
Hello Robert,
yeah ifsetor if much better than the @-?: combination. But for 5.3 that
would be all we could do. For 6 and in the long run we might do a real
ifsetor. If ever we could come to a consensus... and no i don't really like
to restart discussions on ifsetor at this point.
marcus
Tuesd
On 9/11/07, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
>
> how about @?: style?
>
> Like: $val = $myarray[$key] ?: $default;
>
> marcus
There are drawbacks with using the @ style regularly. One is the lack
of error checking: all error messages generated by finding the array
itself
On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 18:54 +0200, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
>
> how about @?: style?
>
> Like: $val = $myarray[$key] ?: $default;
Did you mean like:
@$val = $myarray[$key] ?: $default;
Because that's an expensive assignment since it will hit the error
handler when the index
Hello Andrew,
how about @?: style?
Like: $val = $myarray[$key] ?: $default;
marcus
Tuesday, September 11, 2007, 6:33:42 PM, you wrote:
> On 9/11/07, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello Andrew,
>>
>> did you check out '?:' shortcut in HEAD?
>>
>> php -r 'echo 4?:2;' -> 4
>>
On 9/11/07, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
>
> did you check out '?:' shortcut in HEAD?
>
> php -r 'echo 4?:2;' -> 4
> php -r 'echo 0?:2;' -> 2
>
> best regards
> marcus
Yes, I had hoped that the ?: operator would solve this. But it doesn't
serve the same purpose,
Hello Andrew,
did you check out '?:' shortcut in HEAD?
php -r 'echo 4?:2;' -> 4
php -r 'echo 0?:2;' -> 2
best regards
marcus
Tuesday, September 11, 2007, 3:20:46 PM, you wrote:
> If there's a workable proposal for ifsetor() that fixes the concerns
> brought up by the original and is li
If there's a workable proposal for ifsetor() that fixes the concerns
brought up by the original and is likely to go in PHP 6, that would
be great.
In this case, perfect can be the enemy of good. array_get() helps
with many common use cases of ifsetor() while fitting into the the
standard
Hello Andrew,
you can easily implement this function run time. It is not very flexible
and far away from what ifsetor was meant to be. Thus I do not think it is a
good idea. See comments below.
marcus
Tuesday, September 11, 2007, 12:12:55 AM, you wrote:
> Here's a patch against HEAD that impl
On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:31 PM, Antony Dovgal wrote:
On 11.09.2007 02:12, Andrew Shearer wrote:
Here's a patch against HEAD that implements the array_get function
previously suggested on this list. I also attached a test suite,
which should go in ext/standard/tests/array/array_get.phpt. Feedback
On 11.09.2007 02:12, Andrew Shearer wrote:
> Here's a patch against HEAD that implements the array_get function
> previously suggested on this list. I also attached a test suite,
> which should go in ext/standard/tests/array/array_get.phpt. Feedback
> is welcome.
>
> Independently, someone e
Hi,
Please also add the patch provided by John Bafford last Januari.
Arnold
Andrew Shearer wrote:
I had forgotten that attachments aren't allowed. Here are links to the
patch and test suite.
This ought to work. Sorry for the multiple posts, everyone.
http://ashearer.com/software/array_get/
I had forgotten that attachments aren't allowed. Here are links to
the patch and test suite.
This ought to work. Sorry for the multiple posts, everyone.
http://ashearer.com/software/array_get/2007-09-10-php6/array_get.diff
http://ashearer.com/software/array_get/2007-09-10-php6/array_get.phpt
Here's a patch against HEAD that implements the array_get function
previously suggested on this list. I also attached a test suite,
which should go in ext/standard/tests/array/array_get.phpt. Feedback
is welcome.
Independently, someone else had posted the same idea as a feature
request fo
Let me try that again with the files attached. I'll leave out the
full original proposal this time.
On Sep 10, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Andrew Shearer wrote:
Here's a patch against HEAD that implements the array_get function
previously suggested on this list. I also attached a test suite,
which
21 matches
Mail list logo
