Am 12.04.2011 13:33, schrieb Richard Quadling:
Notice: Undefined variable
Notice: Undefined index
To me, these two notices are totally different in severity, but that may
be because of how i write my code. I'd like to be able to get rid of the
"Undefined index" Notice in a nice, clean, readab
On 12 April 2011 12:33, Richard Quadling wrote:
> [1] http://pastebin.com/qLNYtfAw
Updated to http://pastebin.com/cqSEcGpN to include 0 and '' values.
The output is ...
Undefined variableisset() = false empty() = true
defined = false
Defined variable null value isset() =
Considering that the main impetus for these threads is to write code
that does not generate the notice regarding missing variables or
indices, neither isset() or empty() will provide that completely.
If a variable is declared, but assigned null, it is not set and it is
empty. But so what. The vari
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:09 PM Chris Stockton wrote:
> My suggestion to use ?? I will say has little to do with laziness. I
> would be happy with any solution that solves my problem, I just know
> that implementing a patch for ?? would be simple enough (I could even
> do so if requested). Everyon
Em Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:04:36 +0100, Stas Malyshev
escreveu:
It seems that there are no consensus about this feature so...
*if in doubt, leave it out.*
I don't see any serious objections to it except comments from people
that seem not really understand what this feature is about and compl
Hi!
It seems that there are no consensus about this feature so...
*if in doubt, leave it out.*
I don't see any serious objections to it except comments from people
that seem not really understand what this feature is about and complain
about "bad code" which has nothing to do with the actua
