Re: [PHP5]__get, __set and isset()

M. Sokolewicz wrote:

next time, please read the isset documentation carefully. I quote: [quote]isset() will return FALSE if testing a variable that has been set to NULL.[/quote] Catalin Trifu wrote:

        Hi,

    Is this really a bug. I think not.
    There is no variable $o->a or $a->b in the class OO

there is only the variable $elem and $a and $b is a member of that array

    So ...
    The fact that PHP5 provides __set and __get magic

functions does not mean that the actual variables exist with that particular name in the class ?

    Perhaps it would be nice to have a __isset magic function ?

Cheers Catalin

<?php class OO { private $elem = array("a" => 1); public function __get ($prop) { if (isset($this->elem[$prop])) { return $this->elem[$prop]; } else { return NULL; } } public function __set ($prop, $val) { $this->elem[$prop] = $val; } } $o = new OO(); echo isset($o->a) ? "yes\n" : "no\n"; echo isset($o->b) ? "yes\n" : "no\n"; echo is_null($o->a) ? "yes\n" : "no\n"; echo is_null($o->b) ? "yes\n" : "no\n"; ?> I expected something like this: yes no no yes But got this: no no no yes It looks like isset() can't handle object properties correctly. I'll post the bug on php.net. -- Daniel Schierbeck Next time, please read my post carefully. $a is not NULL, it is 1. Therefore, isset($a) should return TRUE, which it does normally, just not when $a is returned via __get().

@catalin: Yes, a __isset() method would be ideal, but i still can't see why isset() shouldn't support the overloaded variables - after all, if you are able to access such a variable using the __get() method, why shouldn't you be able to check whether or not it has been set? Currently, if you want to check whether a variable in the $elem array is set, you would have to use this: $a = $o->a; echo isset($a) ? "yes\n" : "no\n"; Which in my opinion isn't optimal. Bottom line - if you can access a variable through property overloading you should be able to use isset() on them as well. -- Daniel Schierbeck