#49348 [Asn]: Uninitialized ++$foo->bar; does not cause a notice (but ++$bar; does!)

ID: 49348 Updated by: sjoerd@php.net Reported By: BelStudent at yandex dot ru Status: Assigned Bug Type: Scripting Engine problem Operating System: * PHP Version: 5.*, 6 Assigned To: stas New Comment: I was talking about this: http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_execute.c?revision=286362&view=markup#l251 With ++$foo, type is BP_VAR_RW, which makes sense and gives a notice. With ++$this->foo, it is BP_VAR_W. Previous Comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-08-31 22:12:10] jani@php.net # svn log -r100312 zend_object_handlers.c ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r100312 | stas | 2002-10-20 22:22:04 +0300 (Sun, 20 Oct 2002) | 2 lines looks like this message should go --- Stas, care to explain? Uncommenting that will bring back the notice. And Sjoerd, what did you mean with that comment..? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-08-27 21:06:36] sjoerd@php.net In _get_zval_cv_lookup(), type is BP_VAR_W, while it should be BP_VAR_RW for the example code. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-08-25 08:18:09] jani@php.net Reopened, Gwynne's arguments are rock solid. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-08-25 07:13:46] gwynne@php.net Actually, this is a valid problem; the problem described by bug #21008 is a different issue. There seems to be some confusion as to whether it should be fixed or not, but it's neither a duplicate nor bogus. Specifically, bug #21008 describes an issue with setting a variable to a value, where this report describes an issue with updating a variable. These are two distinct operations, and are handled differently. More to the point, the following code throws a notice: <?php ++$n; ?> That the code described by this bug doesn't is an inconsistency. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [2009-08-24 16:21:58] BelStudent at yandex dot ru Description: ------------ Usually, if you try to do this: ++$num, then thrown notice, that the "Undefined variable: num". This helps avoid errors. But if you have class and you're trying to do so ++$this->num num nowhere and had not previously identified, then the issue no warnings and notices. Accidentally deleted in the symbol and received ++$this->nu, and then climbed into hell knows what mistakes to find this place and correct to ++$this->num took several hours. So I am very concerned about the issue: how to do so were given notice, if you try to do something with uninitialized (unknown) variable in the class? Reproduce code: --------------- <?php class A { public function __construct() { ++$this->num; } } new A(); ?> Expected result: ---------------- Undefined property: A::$num Actual result: -------------- empty ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=49348&edit=1