Re: suggestion about ternary operator

Le Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:28:39 -0600, Larry Garfield a écrit : > On Friday 20 November 2009 11:12:29 pm Alban wrote: > >> This is not a big problem but if a solution exists, this would be so >> cool ! Especialy when we have to check existance of twenty or more key >> in array. Code would be be lighter and clear. > > I cannot comment on the rest of your post right now, but if you are > checking for the existence of a bunch of keys in an associative array > and setting defaults if they are not set, the following will be > considerably faster and easier to read: > > $my_array += array( > 'a' => 'A', > 'b' => 'B', > 'c' => 'C', > ); > > That will set $my_array['a'] to A iff it doesn't exist, ['b'] to B iff > it doesn't exist, etc. That is far nicer to read than a bunch of > ternaries, short-circuited or no. You can even stick the defaults array > into a function and call it from various places to ensure your array > always has the same sane defaults. Yes, union operator is a pretty solution for arrays. -- Alban Leroux seza@paradoxal.org