# zend_hash_update question

- Thread: https://externals.io/message/44283
- Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/44283
- Started by david.zuelke@bitextender.com on 2009-06-15T13:13:57+00:00
- Messages: 4
- Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net
- More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt

---

## #44283 — david.zuelke@bitextender.com — 2009-06-15T13:13:57+00:00

URL: https://externals.io/message/44283#44283

Hi folks,

while fixing http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=48557 I was wondering why  
zend_hash_update doesn't automatically convert numeric strings to  
integers.

Doing $foo = array('1' => 'bar'); actually results in an integer key  
with value 1, not in a string. The problem in the bug above was that  
when ext/soap decodes keys from a hashmap, it won't convert numeric  
string keys to integers. As a result, such items in an array were  
never accessible from PHP code (that is, unless you did some  
 `array_keys()`/array_values() stunts, of course).

Is this intentional? It seems that every internal feature that would  
like to deal with hashes needs to implement this string->int casting  
behavior of PHP itself. Why doesn't zend_hash_update() do it  
automatically?

Cheers,

David

---

## #44285 — david.zuelke@bitextender.com — 2009-06-15T13:47:59+00:00

URL: https://externals.io/message/44283#44285

> Hi David,

Hey Matt,


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Zülke"
> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009
>
> > […]
>
> I saw the patch there for Bug #48557, and the is_numeric_string() +  
> zend_hash/index/_update() isn't necessary -- that's what  
> zend_symtable_update() is for. :-)  It's used elsewhere and takes  
> care of checking for numeric string keys.

Aaah!


> `hash_update()` used to do that until the "symtable" variation was  
> added several years ago, and there were places in PHP that weren't  
> updated and had this issue.  Obviously there's still one at least!   
> (Or maybe that's newer code that simply used the wrong function in  
> the first place...)

Yeah I guess that's the case here.


> I'm assuming `hash_update()` is intended to be an optimized version by  
> only working with strings, in places where it's already known -- in  
> the engine, walking through arrays where the type of key is already  
> known, etc.
>
> Kinda confusing, but hope that helps.  Seems like they should've  
> *added* a new function that does what `hash_update()` now does,  
> instead of basically renaming the old version to  
> symtable_update(). :-/

It does help, absolutely. Thanks a lot!

- David

---

## #44286 — david.zuelke@bitextender.com — 2009-06-15T14:16:12+00:00

URL: https://externals.io/message/44283#44286 · In reply to: #44285

Patch updated to reflect the change. It's against 5.3 btw. Now who  
will commit it so it makes it into the next RC? :)

- David




> 
>
> > […]
>
> Hey Matt,
>
>
> > […]
>
> Aaah!
>
>
> > […]
>
> Yeah I guess that's the case here.
>
>
> > […]
>
> It does help, absolutely. Thanks a lot!
>
> - David

---

## #44287 — Felipe Pena — 2009-06-15T17:33:14+00:00

URL: https://externals.io/message/44283#44287 · In reply to: #44286

Hi David,

Em Seg, 2009-06-15 às 16:16 +0200, David Zülke escreveu:
> Patch updated to reflect the change. It's against 5.3 btw. Now who  
> will commit it so it makes it into the next RC? :)
> 

I've committed it, thanks. (5.2+)


-- 
Regards,
Felipe Pena