Bringing up this old issue a bit.
Nothing was ever said of unset? Should unset be benign?
Since unset() is intended to take an action (rather than check on state)
shouldn't an invalid unset (one with a guarded property that doesn't
have a setter) emit a warning?
On 10/30/2012 10:37 PM,
Would you say the same of unset? Always benign?
On 10/29/2012 2:14 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this-b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o-b)) {
/* delete files */
}
echo
-Original Message-
From: Clint Priest [mailto:cpri...@zerocue.com]
Sent: 28 October 2012 16:03
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this-b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o-b)) {
/* delete files */
Hi!
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this-b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o-b)) {
/* delete files */
}
echo (int)isset($o-b); /* This should return false and not emit any
sort of warning/notice? */
Hi!
Is there another class of error that would make more sense? Don't most
people turn off E_NOTICE errors? Perhaps emit an E_STRICT?
I always run with E_NOTICE in development, that's kind of what E_NOTICE
is for :) I don't think isset() should produce any warnings/notices -
this is how it
hi Clint,
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Clint Priest cpri...@zerocue.com wrote:
That's basically what #2 is getting at, my only question is, emit a warning
or notice or not?
Technically returning false on an invalid isset() call could be misleading
without emitting some kind of notice or
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this-b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o-b)) {
/* delete files */
}
echo (int)isset($o-b); /* This should return false and not emit any
sort of warning/notice? */
I mean specifically,
On 29/10/12 03:02, Clint Priest wrote:
So... to be explicit here, you think in this situation:
class a {
public $b {
set($x) { $this-b = $x; }
}
}
$o = new a();
if(!isset($o-b)) {
/* delete files */
}
echo (int)isset($o-b); /* This should return false and not emit any
sort of
That's pretty fair, that last statement... As far as an application is
concerned $o-b doesn't exist because it can't be read.
Seems as though some developers are going to want to know when they've
tried to violate it though... I dunno. Personally I would consider it
error or warning worthy
That's basically what #2 is getting at, my only question is, emit a
warning or notice or not?
Technically returning false on an invalid isset() call could be
misleading without emitting some kind of notice or warning about it.
On 10/26/2012 9:56 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
1. If
I'm opening up several new threads to get discussion going on the
remaining being debated categories referenced in this 1.1 - 1.2
change spec:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented/change-requests
Hi!
1. If all cases can be tested for during compilation, prefer
compile failures.
Not likely. isset($foo-$bar) is completely opaque since we don't know
what $foo or $bar is.
2. Let the compilation occur and at runtime when a disallowed
action is attempted, emit a
12 matches
Mail list logo
