Re: suggestion about ternary operator

On 22.11.2009, at 03:13, D. Dante Lorenso wrote: > Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: >> On 21.11.2009, at 22:29, Dante Lorenso wrote: >>> I would love to restate my recommendation for the function "filled". >>> Which is the opposite of "empty". Filled would accept a variable >>> number of arguments and return the first where empty evaluates as >>> false. >>> >>> Like empty, filled would not throw notices for undefined variables. >>> This is not the same as the ifsetor debate because filled is opposite >>> empty and cares not about isset. >> did you even read the RFC? > > Yes I did, and all I see is this in the References section: > > "Suggestion to leave an empty() variant out of the picture since > this feature can be implemented in userland, though this of > course not provide the full functionality of empty() which > does not trigger notices for missing variables" > > I didn't see my proposal listed in it anywhere. See this recommendation from 3 1/2 years > ago: > > - May 03, 2006 > > http://www.mail-archive.com/internals@lists.php.net/msg21617.html Maybe I am then misunderstanding your proposal, as to me it is clearly covered and deemed not possible: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/ifsetor#rejected_features $var = ifsetor($var, $var2, "admin"); However this is currently not possible to be implemented without major slowdowns to the engine. regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith mls@pooteeweet.org