Re[2]: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.1

Why isn't is possible in userland? Is there any problem with using this? function ifsetor(&$var, $default = null) { return isset($var) ? $var : $default; } echo ifsetor($a, 'foo'); echo $a, $b; echo ifsetor($a, 'foo'); echo isset($a) ? 'is set' : 'not set'; expected result: foo Notice: Undefined variable: a in [...] Notice: Undefined variable: b in [...] foo not set actual result: foo Notice: Undefined variable: b in [...] foo not set php does not issue a notice on using $a after having called ifsetor() once. But further calls to isset() and ifsetor() keep returning the expected results. I'd assume, the missing notice is rather a bug than a feature. So ifsetor() is possible in userland. -- Sven > If it were possible at all to make a function accept unset variables without > generating a notice, I think ifsetor() shouldn't even be implemented. People > could then have the freedom to create such functions themselves. But > unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be possible, unless you'd suppress every > function call with a @, which I don't think is the way to go in this case. > So if it would be possible somehow to create your own isset()-like functions > in PHP-code, I'd say implement something that would make that possible, and > ingore the whole ifsetor() discussion from that moment on. People would be > free to write whatever function they'd prefer. > Ron > ""Sara Golemon"" <pollita@php.net> wrote in message > news:38.CE.21296.BFD78A24@pb1.pair.com... >> > > What about ifsetor for 5.1 ? >> > >> > Would anybody be interested in a parameter for ifsetor() that would > treat >> > isset() as !empty() or an alternative function that achieves this? I > know >> > I'd love to see that. I use empty() a lot more than isset(). >> > >> In the interrest of KISS, I'd leave the emptiness concept out of the >> picture. Unlike isset-ness, an emptiness coalesce *can* be done in >> userspace: >> >> function firstNotEmpty() { >> $vars = func_get_args(); >> foreach($vars as $var) >> if (!empty($var)) return $var; >> return NULL; >> } >> >> There's enough....contention over the undeniably useful and >> not-implementable-in-userspace parts of this thread that it's not worth >> muddling it up with things that are a simple matter to do in userspace. > It >> doesn't matter that notempty() and ifsetor() could easily be implemented > by >> the same opcode (just like isset/empty are). >> >> -Sara