Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88365 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 32807 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2015 22:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Sep 2015 22:16:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:56017] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DC/50-31193-65D8CF55 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:16:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 633 invoked by uid 89); 18 Sep 2015 22:16:52 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 626, pid: 630, t: 0.3148s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.8?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@86.160.91.166) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 18 Sep 2015 22:16:52 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <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> <55FC5A14.8020301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55FC8D53.3080904@lsces.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 23:16:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Address PHPSadness #28? From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 18/09/15 21:32, Rowan Collins wrote: > It would not be a replacement for is_null, nor for isset(), but a way of writing a completely new type of code, which examined not a variable's value, but its state within the Engine. Rowan ... why is using is_null() and isset() after using array_key_exists() to identify the variable exists any different to wanting to use them after having used extract() on the same array? I get that you would prefer to convince users to use the pre-extract variables, but then why would you need extract? If you have extract, then checking that an extracted variable exists and if it is set or not are simply natural mirrors of the same function on the array? I don't see any 'completely new type of code' ... only a different frame in which the variables are held. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk