Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88183
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain craigfrancis.co.uk designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
In-Reply-To: <55F6B911.9080400@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:57:45 +0100
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <96BE7F01-D04B-483B-B1A3-B45CED6DFCDC@craigfrancis.co.uk>
References: <CAKws9z27kVJ87Ur5Qo+ayYHPeeO=aYKpRHUV4TFBXX2iMcgO2A@mail.gmail.com> <55DD4269.4090402@gmail.com> <6348DFA7-04BD-41BB-A500-17A8A531B56C@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55DDA4C9.9040603@gmail.com> <3C69BF4B-52E6-4D04-8601-8D23DFCC538E@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55DDD60F.5090509@gmail.com> <8C74463E-DBA2-4015-8159-0B44D973387F@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55DE0907.6040904@gmail.com> <1F615BCD-1B9B-4C51-A210-869F1AA1F6E3@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55E5EBBF.6020803@gmail.com> <0BA3A129-D356-4781-B6DE-E2B5A7924AE2@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55E6EC36.6090301@gmail.com> <E1C02A1A-EB7C-40D9-8760-13627CC7BF85@craigfrancis.co.uk> <9AF329EC-99A5-412D-A52B-432627A5520F@gmail.com> <6F4D91EE-B56E-4B83-B1AF-598C3F6897FC@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55F07BA4.2000204@gmail.com> <E8634CF1-C2B4-4C5A-8DDC-531D9599774B@craigfrancis.co.uk> <55F6B911.9080400@gmail.com>
To: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Address PHPSadness #28?
From: craig@craigfrancis.co.uk (Craig Francis)

Hi Rowan,

I think I've said everything I can from my point of view (and my =
understanding of how other developers see and use the isset function).

And that's not to say I disagree with what your saying Rowan, I'm just =
voicing my view that I think a language with exists() would be nicer =
than the slightly messy isset()... but each to their own.

Maybe Scott (who proposed the idea) might follow up with more =
information?

Otherwise I'm off on holiday, see you in a few weeks :-)

Craig





On 14 Sep 2015, at 13:09, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote:

> Craig Francis wrote on 14/09/2015 12:46:
>> So yes, in the example above, an isset() would work, but I was trying =
to show why I don't think it's odd to "suppress a warning for a plain =
variable" when it does not exist.
>=20
> Yes, and I agree that this example shows a reasonable use of isset(). =
It works fine as it is, and doesn't need any functionality adding or =
removing.
>=20
>=20
>> Actually, I think they do use an array to store the values, then do =
an extract() to make them local variables in the View (keeping the =
variable names shorter and easier to read).
>=20
> Incidentally, I've always wondered why extract() would ever be useful =
in modern code, but I agree that if you don't want/need the overhead of =
a separate template compiler, that approach actually works quite nicely.
>=20
>=20
>> Yes, it is mis-used with arrays, but I would still argue that a =
single exists() function would work better for all of these examples =
when testing if they exist.
>>=20
>> And I would hope that no-one was using an unset() as something =
distinctly different from a NULL value.
>=20
> If you don't need the ability to distinguish unset() from null, what =
would any of these examples gain from using exists() over isset()?
>=20
>=20
>> I agree that we should not have a function that distinguishes between =
unset($foo) and $foo=3Dnull.
>=20
> But if you take the "is null" check out of isset(), that's exactly =
what you have; that's why the "is null" check is there in the first =
place.
>=20
> That's why I said I could agree with an exists() function (not under =
that name) as a nicer syntax for array_key_exists(), but not as a =
replacement for isset().
>=20
> You could have an exists() function which works like =
array_key_exists() on an array, but identically to isset() on plain =
variables, but I think that would just be confusing. Hence my suggestion =
that any new function throw an error if given something other than an =
array access.
>=20
> Regards,
> --=20
> Rowan Collins
> [IMSoP]