isset() does more than check the existance in a hash table, because this the
following is true:
$foo = null;
isset($foo); // returns false, even though $foo is initialized
echo $foo;// will not cause a NOTICE, because $foo is initialized
- Ron
Richard Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
Should I go ahead and submit this patch? Where should I go about doing so? I
looked around bugs.php.net but am unsure.
On 4/17/06, Ron Korving [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
isset() does more than check the existance in a hash table, because this
the
following is true:
$foo = null;
isset($foo);
We had a huge thread about this a while back (1-2 years) where this
was discussed in great depth. The agreement was that for isset() it's
very straight forward and usefull and that the semantics with empty()
would be confusing and problematic, and therefore, the decision was
to just support
Nope you shouldn't, as per my previous email.
At 10:46 AM 4/17/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should I go ahead and submit this patch? Where should I go about doing so? I
looked around bugs.php.net but am unsure.
On 4/17/06, Ron Korving [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
isset() does more than check
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following is a direct excerpt from the PHP manual on empty, and isset:
bool *empty* ( mixed var )
bool *isset* ( mixed var [, mixed var [, ...]] )
Is there a reason empty does not allow multiple variables at a time, as
On Sun, April 16, 2006 4:40 pm, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a thought about it, and that is that we could not decide
whether it should be an AND or an OR test between the different
parameters.
I'm curious to know whoulda thunk it would be OR,
As empty is quite the contrary of isset, the OR would be preferable
over AND.
Indeed:
if(!empty($var1) !empty($var2))
could be simplified to
if(!empty($var1, $var2))
Regards.
--
Etienne Kneuss
http://www.colder.ch/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing
On 4/17/06, Lukas Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following is a direct excerpt from the PHP manual on empty, and isset:
bool *empty* ( mixed var )
bool *isset* ( mixed var [, mixed var [, ...]] )
Is there a reason
Indeed, especially as everyone will tell you that isset and empty are
equivalent.
Are you saying that people misunderstand that or that you believe that
to be true? I see that misunderstanding a lot. I have to educate
people on that. They don't seem to grok the subtle, yet crucial (and I
On Sun, April 16, 2006 6:25 pm, Etienne Kneuss wrote:
As empty is quite the contrary of isset, the OR would be preferable
over AND.
Sorry, folks!
I meant the other way 'round...
Whatever it is you check with a zillion form inputs, that's what you'd
want.
When would you need it the other way
What it comes down to, is it runs the exact same code on the variables,
I just changed the method of which they were called (ie: allowed multiple.)
On 4/16/06, Richard Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, April 16, 2006 7:38 pm, Pierre wrote:
isset and empty share the same implementation,
11 matches
Mail list logo
