Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88347 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 97345 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2015 18:25:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Sep 2015 18:25:10 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 83.112.237.179 AAubervilliers-652-1-230-179.w83-112.abo.wanadoo.fr Received: from [83.112.237.179] ([83.112.237.179:16188] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3C/17-60254-4075CF55 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:25:10 -0400 To: internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes References: <55FB19CB.7080707@gmail.com> <55FB3117.5040204@lsces.co.uk> <55FB3A60.1040601@gmail.com> <55FB4270.7000204@lsces.co.uk> <55FB4969.7080600@gmail.com> <55FB5BA6.6050606@lsces.co.uk> <55FBF265.5000502@gmail.com> <55FBF7B7.4050603@lsces.co.uk> <55FC1A77.7090406@gmail.com> <55FC221A.7020108@lsces.co.uk> <55FC2588.6030809@gmail.com> <55FC2B17.3070909@lsces.co.uk> <55FC2F2F.9060403@gmail.com> <55FC33F1.3090903@lsces.co.uk> <55FC354B.5070209@gmail.com> <55FC39B2.5070005@lsces.co.uk> <55FC45C7.9010202@gmail.com> <55FC4991.1050903@lsces.co.uk> <7872E9F4-AE19-4681-B2EF-215751AE4CBE@thesba.com> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 20:24:58 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32) X-Posted-By: 83.112.237.179 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Address PHPSadness #28? From: bensor987@neuf.fr ("Benoit Schildknecht") Le Fri, 18 Sep 2015 19:40:50 +0200, Robert Williams = a =C3=A9crit: >> On Sep 18, 2015, at 10:27, Lester Caine wrote: >> >> All I am saying is that 'exists()' is simply part of the toolkit that= >> goes WITH extract(). There is a suitable tool in arrays and in object= s >> so why not complete the toolkit in straight variables. The names are = a >> mess between the three for many reasons and producing a complete new = set >> of function names has been another call, but there is a simple hole h= ere >> in a style of coding which there seems little logical reason NOT to = >> fill. > > Exactly, there=E2=80=99s clearly a gap here. Further, enough people wa= nt it that = > a few have shown up on this list, which means there are probably many,= = > many thousands, or even millions, of people out in the wild that want = = > it. I=E2=80=99m not familiar enough with PHP=E2=80=99s internals to sa= y for sure, but I = > suspect it=E2=80=99s not terribly hard to implement (it=E2=80=99s just= isset() without = > the extra null check). So=E2=80=A6 why not? Like anything else in the = language, = > people don=E2=80=99t have to use it if they don=E2=80=99t want to, but= it=E2=80=99s good to have = > tools. Yes, even tools that can be abused. > > -Bob I agree. exists() would allow PHP devs to make more secure, cleaner and = = lighter code. It fills a gap and would be useful to a lot of devs.