Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:53778
Return-Path: <nikita.ppv@googlemail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 45702 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2011 12:21:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 8 Jul 2011 12:21:16 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=nikita.ppv@googlemail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=nikita.ppv@googlemail.com; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: nikita.ppv@googlemail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.42 mail-ew0-f42.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.215.42] ([209.85.215.42:38564] helo=mail-ew0-f42.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 50/00-45592-936F61E4 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:21:14 -0400
Received: by ewy2 with SMTP id 2so632718ewy.29
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 05:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        bh=b0vM/5Ur7n7uWAUzEnralTvhc5T4vzwbcJQkurZy6gE=;
        b=JtMxtEhRscgEKp7FCwBGcwDUvhWv4IM+1HDVGkRZb9HDjISoyjiEdh+Y41uRpZp9rT
         5VtxQ3fCeRyy9ESe81OLm9+quSttJelh0xSGq2Yy1iec4FdPCsMlbQRUcu/B2Kg13hPJ
         aG6z10+4fjXReEfFM7qzvZtJd0Y8JaIs0QG68=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.47.13 with SMTP id s13mr592754eeb.214.1310127626222; Fri,
 08 Jul 2011 05:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.99.131 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 05:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOhuFvYPA326gnvmAxUPoFfh6ETeKcahAQpGVBvGTgh2UkuJDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOhuFvYPA326gnvmAxUPoFfh6ETeKcahAQpGVBvGTgh2UkuJDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 14:20:26 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c_YynOmQthrsnTw=hGhVEpBie1h8c-JqUs5FAzoqy7SBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rafael Dohms <listas@rafaeldohms.com.br>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba5bb905c57ba304a78ddb51
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] preg_match
From: nikita.ppv@googlemail.com (Nikita Popov)

--90e6ba5bb905c57ba304a78ddb51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

The most common use for preg_match is validation:

if (!preg_match('~...~', $string)) { /* do something */ }

Here $matches is not required, only the 0/1 return value of preg_match is of
interest.

Furthermore, even if you need $matches, you should always combine it with an
if:

if (!preg_match('~...~', $string, $matches)) { /* do something with $matches
*/ }

Otherwise you will access $matches even though the match failed (which will
result in errors).

Thus: There is no need to change behavior here.

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Rafael Dohms <listas@rafaeldohms.com.br>wrote:

> I was wondering if anyone ever thought of either fixing or writing a
> new function that would make preg_match actually work in a way that
> made sense?
>
> right now i need to pass in a optional parameter that will receive the
> match, in this case one or no match, why should this not be the
> function's return already?
>
> something like:
>
> $string = "<td>my text</td>";
> $result = preg_match("/\<td\>(.*)\<\/td\>/", $string);
>
> $result // = "my text"
>
> Maybe something like preg_extract? I do not have the C skills to write
> a patch but i think adding a new function would not break BC or have
> negative side effects, would it?
>
> --
> Rafael Dohms
> PHP Evangelist and Community Leader
> http://www.rafaeldohms.com.br
> http://www.phpsp.org.br
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--90e6ba5bb905c57ba304a78ddb51--