Re: array_change_key_case()? key_exists()?

On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Derick Rethans wrote: > On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Egon Schmid wrote: > > > Please revert that patch from Jeroen. I have something about > > undocumented functions. > > done with pleasure. The reason for (temporarily at least) commenting them was to prevent users from learning from that function without a proper discussion wether they really belong in PHP. Once they are documented, there's just another BC problem created. So please do not revert it until properly discussed. I didn't have the chance to respond to various arguments yet. Egon and Goba: this is just while the discussion is going on, if it's decided that they should stay as it is now, you can uncomment it again tomorrow - what does a day make on a function not being documented for months? Okay, to the discussion itself: (array_)key_exists: As Andi said, there is a reason why isset behaves like it behaves now. IMO, I see two possibilities: (a): if that reason isn't valid anymore, let's fix isset in stead of adding another function (b): if it IS valid, then why would key_exists be useful and good, IMO key_exists should follow isset(), rendering it superflueous. array_change_key_case: Well... there be performance issues, but no matter what, a more general-use function should be created - if one. For example a array_walk like function which applies a random function to each key. (doesn't array_walk already support this?) So I'm still quite against array_change_key_case, for array_key_exists there might be good arguments in favor, I didn't yet read them, but even. I recommented those functions just to prevent a "It's in the manual now, you cannot revert it, because of BC" closing of this discussion which is definitely something undesireable. --Jeroen Jeroen van Wolffelaar Jeroen@A-Eskwadraat.nl http://www.A-Eskwadraat.nl/~jeroen