new function?

Hi Andrei :)

Andrei Zmievski wrote:

Hi,
just a correction, I meant array_diff when i wrote array_intersect.
array_diff is more handy since just count($res)==0 is enough, $res is the
returned array of array_diff().

Did you actually try array_intersect()?

• Andrei

Here it is :
andrey@poohie:~/dev/5_0> cat s2.php
<?php
$i = 0;
while ($i++ < 1000) {
$a[] = $i;
}
$start = microtime(1);
$res = in_array_all(100, 2, 3, $a, true);
$end = microtime(1);
var_dump($res);
printf("Time : %3.5f\n",$end - $start);
$needles = array(100, 2, 3);
$start = microtime(1);
$diff = array_intersect($needles, $a);
$end = microtime(1);
var_dump($diff);
printf("Time : %3.5f\n",$end - $start);

?>andrey@poohie:~/dev/5_0> ./php s2.php
bool(true)
Time : 0.00010
array(3) {
[0]=>
int(100)
[1]=>
int(2)
[2]=>
int(3)
}
Time : 0.03078

About 300x .

Andrey

Andrey Hristov wrote:

Hi,
I didn't write this function to be faster. You asked about
array_intersect()
and I decided to bechmark (you didn't ask for it though). What I had
in mind
when I decided to write it was to escape this :
if (in_array("some_element", $haystack) && in_array("other_element",
$haystack) && in_array("third_element", $haystack))

which with this function will be :
in_array_all("first_element","second_element", "third_element",
$haystack)

In addtion, I have no problem with the proposal the needles to be
passed as an array as first parameter. I did the current proto in the
way it's now since it's more consistent with in_array().

Finally, I hope that the list will decide.

Andrey

Christian Schneider wrote:

Hi Andrey,

My personal feeling is that not enough people use this to make the
pure speed improvement worth a new function. I guess the list will
decide...

• Chris

I like the idea of passing an array of needles, I wonder if you could
just add the ability to pass a needles array to in_array, rather than
create a new function.
Anyways, it adds flexability, I would use it.

Jason