Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21881
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <43F473DF.1080509@iamjochem.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 13:45:19 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: fangel@nable.dk
Cc: Antony Dovgal <antony@zend.com>,
	php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <200602161232.48780.fangel@nable.dk> <43F4647B.9030506@zend.com> <200602161255.37040.fangel@nable.dk>
In-Reply-To: <200602161255.37040.fangel@nable.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Unexpected "silent" type-cast with initialized but
	un-set members
From: jochem@iamjochem.com (Jochem Maas)

Morten Fangel wrote:
> On Thursday 16 February 2006 12:39, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> 
>><?php
>>$a->bar = 1;
>>var_dump($a);
>>?>
>>This code is much simpler, huh?
> 
> Yeah, I must have been blinded by the lights. It merely resembles
> $foo['bar'] = 'baz';
> Where $foo is cast as an array without the need to do $foo = array(); first.
> 
> So I guess there is no need for a notice when you apply the same "pattern" to 
> an object. 

if that is the logic being applied in the engine then one might to wonder why a
function such as array_merge() was changed to emit a warning when any of
it's arguments are not arrays (whereas sometime in the past it used to swallow
[and I assume 'autocast'] whatever it was given without a hiccup).

I have been told that such warnings as array_merge() now emits are for my own
good (in not so many words I was told it was "to protect me from my stupid self"),
if it's good for me when I use array_merge() why not when an object is created
implicitly (as in the example above)? actually my preference would be to drop the warning
in array_merge() in this case (it seems like a more php way of doing things, imo)

<!--

unset($a); $a->i = 1; 				// this is not a problem
$b = 1; $c = 2; $d = array_merge($b, $c);	// but this is bad programming?

-->

I'm very interested to learn what people think about this kind of thing in general -
and obviously if someone knows of material that explains the reasoning behind the
percieved inconsistency/problem I'd be very grateful.

tar,
jochem