Re: Re: Question about superglobals

That's a good point too, usually when globals are used at all they are used in numerous functions It's very rare to see a variable that's used as a global in one or two functions. > This assumes there is never a good reason for a super global which makes > me wonder why PHP has super globals at all then? What if, because I use > it so often and want to differentiate it, it just works better for me to > make it a super global? I could always name it with the standard $_ > naming scheme so as to not run into accidental use. I don't often use > globals but when I do it's usually because it's something I'll use a > lot. It doesn't benefit code readability to have the same thing repeated > hundreds of times. It's not a big issue but I do like the idea of making > super globals easy to do. On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 20:44 -0700, Michael McGlothlin wrote: > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > >> Well this is very common with PHP, it's very flexible and it's easy for > >> a bad programmer to create chaotic code and get away with it, but this > >> can happen with many features of PHP. For serious developers however, > > > > Right. This is why I don't think it's a good idea to add one more > > feature with very high potential for abuse. Code that changes > > behaviour of unrelated other code is usually very bad idea - think > > about what happens if some of your functions somewhere among 10K lines > > of code used $cfg as local variable and then you added $cfg as > > superglobal. > > > >> them. No point in holding stuff back from people who could benefit from > >> it just to protect inexperienced them from their own sloppiness. You > >> know what I mean? > > > > Yes, there is a point in not implementing features that would promote > > bad coding and unnecessary surprises for the users. Especially when > > the same function can be achieved with existing functionality in a > > much better way. > This assumes there is never a good reason for a super global which makes > me wonder why PHP has super globals at all then? What if, because I use > it so often and want to differentiate it, it just works better for me to > make it a super global? I could always name it with the standard $_ > naming scheme so as to not run into accidental use. I don't often use > globals but when I do it's usually because it's something I'll use a > lot. It doesn't benefit code readability to have the same thing repeated > hundreds of times. It's not a big issue but I do like the idea of making > super globals easy to do. > > All this forcefulness of writing pristine code from the people that > teach people that it's okay to inline their HTML, Javascript, CSS, SQL, > and who knows what else into their PHP? Talk about a recipe for > disaster. Oh well, at least you didn't refuse to add a switch statement > like Python.