Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88443
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.179 as permitted sender)
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAKws9z27kVJ87Ur5Qo+ayYHPeeO=aYKpRHUV4TFBXX2iMcgO2A@mail.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>
 <op.x4573wqthuszwh@tsukapiou.home> <55FC5A14.8020301@gmail.com>
 <op.x46bf5grhuszwh@tsukapiou.home>
 <BAAC6F1B-3DDC-4D0C-8802-3B8210AEF13E@gmail.com>
 <55FC8D53.3080904@lsces.co.uk>
 <93020C79-3920-4FC8-8B6B-F1D16C6C709C@gmail.com>
 <55FD7613.1080403@lsces.co.uk>
 <9B86E351-089D-4356-BC8A-F683BA31D1A8@gmail.com>
 <EEB103A9-DA8C-4025-B06A-75925095BACC@php.net> <5602778C.2070205@gmail.com>
 <56027EC6.1020206@lsces.co.uk> <560281B9.5050808@gmail.com>
 <56029980.20002@lsces.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5602D4D9.1060701@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 17:35:37 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56029980.20002@lsces.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------040409090900010300020102"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.1 - Address PHPSadness #28?
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

--------------040409090900010300020102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Lester Caine wrote on 23/09/2015 13:22:
> NOW WE AGREE ;)
> Simply because I DON'T want call 'isset() and is_null()' what*I*  need
> is is_exist() which is the missing function. THEN either of the other is
> redundant, but neither replaces the check that the variable actually
> exists and it's that which prevents a clean program flow.

Absolutely.

To be clear, my position is no longer that you are "wrong" to want this 
function, only that your need for it is unusual, and not what most 
people are looking for when they use isset().

That's why I propose a function of "variable_exists(string 
$variable_name): boolean" for those cases where code is working with 
dynamic variable names, in the same way as function_exists() and 
class_exists() support working with dynamic definitions and autoloading.


> If you
> read more rows YES they will have the same set of columns but there is
> nothing demanding that every column in the database is actually returned
> in every query? Only returning the subset needed for the job is
> perfectly sensible and there are a number of ways that can happen

OK, that makes sense.


Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]

--------------040409090900010300020102--