Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:10966
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 03:27:39 +0200
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <1093095066.20040708032739@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Marc Richards <contact_marcos@yahoo.es>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <20040708002654.7442.qmail@pb1.pair.com>
References: <20040708002654.7442.qmail@pb1.pair.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] what happened to that new isset() like language construct
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Marc,

it somply was far too lat3e in relase process. That's wy we ae all agreed
to delay that until 5.1. Also we were very unsure about the name of such
an operator....if you can collect all the ideas or can come up with ther
perfect one!?!

a patch is here:
http://marcus-boerger.de/php/ext/ze2/ze2-ifsetor-20040416-4.diff.txt
(maybe a little bit outdated)

regards
marcus


Thursday, July 8, 2004, 2:26:31 AM, you wrote:


> On 4/15/2004 Jason Garber asked about a new language construct to 
> simplify testing if a variable isset() and assinging a default value for 
> those that aren't.  The thread title was "Construct Request".


> I rember reading it while the discussion went on, I just went back and 
> browsed through it again.  Everyone seemed to agree the it was generally 
> a good idea and there was some minimal amount of consensus on the ?: 
> syntax, but I can't tell if this was ever implemented.

> Was it?  If not did I miss the reason why?


> Marc




-- 
Best regards,
 Marcus                            mailto:helly@php.net