Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63728 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 75149 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2012 03:37:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Oct 2012 03:37:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cpriest@zerocue.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cpriest@zerocue.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cpriest@zerocue.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.200.53.250 mail.zerocue.com Received: from [67.200.53.250] ([67.200.53.250:51635] helo=mail.zerocue.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 79/51-01296-8EC90905 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:37:15 -0500 Received: from [172.17.0.122] (unknown [72.179.52.187]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.zerocue.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D4F1120382; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 03:37:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50909CDF.9090505@zerocue.com> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:37:03 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stas Malyshev CC: Pierre Joye , "internals@lists.php.net" References: <508A68B9.1050801@zerocue.com> <508AA48D.5010903@sugarcrm.com> <508C1C4F.6060406@zerocue.com> <508D5726.8080200@zerocue.com> <508ED5A4.9010100@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: <508ED5A4.9010100@sugarcrm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2 : isset / unset "failable" From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest) Would you say the same of unset? Always benign? On 10/29/2012 2:14 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation: >> >> class a { >> public $b { >> set($x) { $this->b = $x; } >> } >> } >> >> $o = new a(); >> >> if(!isset($o->b)) { >> /* delete files */ >> } >> echo (int)isset($o->b); /* This should return false and not emit any >> sort of warning/notice? */ > isset should return false, since $b is not set value. It should not > produce any warning. Of course (int) would produce 0 then ;) > >> I mean specifically, there is no getter defined, therefore the result >> if isset is indeterminate and while I can see it not causing execution > No, the result is determinate - it's false. That's the point of isset() > in PHP and that's how it is used in existing code. > >> to stop I don't see it being a good idea to not warn the developer that >> what they've attempted is not correct. Without a getter, isset() is >> not a legal call (since the value cannot be retrieved). > isset() should always be legal. This is the way to check if $o->b is legal. > > -- -Clint