Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:51903
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=xXczE0bTj0Q0GxzZfUp21i/28ZwOtUqldyXjIrYILznMZiRXTNcGt2UjMj/4s3HWc9
         lFaSYmbgxRX38XHwVtRKpJ0DL65n4zJFe9RGyAYQEQMmu4RkYrWly+wZHEJD62Ec39Rw
         rRTId+qPFRKXGLq1alvgGR1CrXZ+GM3trV9s8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimiH2vYWEY8JAf0P_GD81AqGmStDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTiknomAsTrsZ140rWs6CwxJP3UYGUokQbERhDiRp@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D9E0543.1080600@lerdorf.com>
	<69.82.36433.EC33E9D4@pb1.pair.com>
	<4D9E34C4.5000406@lerdorf.com>
	<4D9E429B.20503@sugarcrm.com>
	<4D9E96B6.6060401@lerdorf.com>
	<BANLkTi=LvYLaOoGgrzrWfYbQ+t9Wzv_XeQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTim6ZBWw66rzx_gSvWc9E45EZx2_gw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinxG6FtOqa8KzmvgTT1EFfM-6prow@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinsnqGSVTz=XPhCfX95mfeJ_pkhCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=nwij4sfkKnNdM_NP9w2CArK6NHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikghRix9VbpHDx+rnCRtnjdjeshmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<718216446.20110408143441@cypressintegrated.com>
	<4DA0E71C.9030008@gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=jJTO3qgjN8=3DCKAV88pnvycVsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.vtp8l9jnr8a5bd@localhost>
	<4DA63ED8.4080402@yahoo.com.au>
	<op.vtw5fnjar8a5bd@localhost>
	<BANLkTi=jFJpqEX+8_yiCZbKVkYc1+EhnSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinPUnzXpfj8AVeaUBi1YSgveCzrPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA6F2BC.10706@yahoo.com.au>
	<BANLkTi=4SD2fzwMc5uLquBkHeBmxDRC0DA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA6FB03.9040404@yahoo.com.au>
	<BANLkTimiH2vYWEY8JAf0P_GD81AqGmStDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:58:57 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinzDxa8gH08qBggrLzziAVb_oksng@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP Development <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636d3464054e16e04a0e22a18
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
From: simpleshot@gmail.com (Adam Richardson)

--001636d3464054e16e04a0e22a18
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Hannes Landeholm <landeholm@gmail.com>wrote:

> Trying to summarize this discussion... I think we can all agree that the
> main problem is "code duplication for array access when parameters are
> possibly not existing". I think we all can also agree that @ can be both
> used properly and misused - and it is a blunt tool and not a nice solution
> to the previously stated problem.
>
> Some suggested that the ternary if comparison should suppress the notice
> automatically. This would break existing code and also be confusing since
> people expect a ternary if and normal if to work the same way.
>
> Some suggested ?? as an array access operator that suppresses the notice
> and
> has 3 variants: A: nothing specified - uses null as default, B: has default
> specified, C: returns X if index exists or Y if index doesn't exist. This
> effectively solves the code duplication problem and is a shortcut for
> saying
> "the array index may or may not exist".
>
> One person said that the relation between ? and ?? and == and === would
> make
> the operator non-intuitive. Other people disagreed and claimed the
> opposite.
>
> So basically the discussion now is what exact characters that should be
> used
> to represent this operator? I really hope we can get this implemented
> quickly... I worked with $_POST yesterday and I could really use that ??
> operator.
>
> ~Hannes
>

There was also my suggestion of a "checked ternary" operator [see my
previous email in this thread.] Backwards compatible, practical, and simple.

Adam

-- 
Nephtali:  A simple, flexible, fast, and security-focused PHP framework
http://nephtaliproject.com

--001636d3464054e16e04a0e22a18--