Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:16575
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <14.77.21296.CE1E7A24@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <ECDCEE8D-2160-46B7-BF84-AB163E477707@botimer.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:28:09 +0200
Lines: 53
Subject: Re: ifsetor(), goto, 5.x, my two cents
From: r.korving@xit.nl ("Ron Korving")

I must say, I like the coalesce() idea a lot. It gives more flexibility over
ifsetor() which sounds to me like it only handles 1 variable that is or
isn't set. coalesce() would handle any number of variables.

Here's something else to consider though:

Would anybody be interested in a parameter for ifsetor() or coalesce() that
would use !empty() instead of isset() ? If coalesce() would become the
function name of choice, you can't drop in a parameter to achieve what I
just said, so an alternative function would be better in that case (or maybe
it would be better in any case). I know I'd love to see some variant like
this. I use empty() a lot more than isset().

Ron


"Noah Botimer" <noah@botimer.net> wrote in message
news:ECDCEE8D-2160-46B7-BF84-AB163E477707@botimer.net...
> Hello all,
>
> Now that my PHP-DEV imap folder has cooled off a bit, I'd like to
> chime in briefly on ifsetor() and goto.
>
> As far as ifsetor() goes, I like the concept.  I would, however,
> suggest a specific behavior and a name change.  I do a lot of
> database code and use things like ISNULL() and COALESCE() to
> translate NULL values to 0's, placeholder strings, etc.  ISNULL()
> typically provides a check of one value, and acts just as a ternary
> operation:
>
> value = check ? check : alternative;
>
> while COALESCE() usually returns the first non-null parameter, or
> NULL if all are parameters are NULL.
>
> Since PHP already supports arbitrary/optional parameters natively, I
> think a single coalesce() function would be a very reasonable
> extension that would behave in an understandable and desirable manner
> (with a name that matches at least some common usage).
>
> As for goto, we may be fighting over nothing.  There is a lot of
> abuse that may be done with goto, as has been illustrated but, with a
> couple of sensible limitations, the horrific problems should be
> averted.  It also seems to me that GOTO is far less often mentioned
> to beginners as a means of flow control since line-numbered BASIC has
> faded.  People who get into trouble with it will likely have a good
> reason to be playing with fire.  I say: put it in, label it
> dangerous, and let the developers decide if it's right for them.
>
> Thanks,
> -Noah Botimer