Re: proposed access modifier "silent" ... was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
| From: | Gustavo Lopes | Date: | Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:21:58 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: proposed access modifier "silent" ... was: Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-51875@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Em Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:04:36 +0100, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> escreveu:
I agree that argument is absurd... Even Freemarker, which is rather unforgiving with missing values (see http://freemarker.org/docs/app_faq.html#faq_picky_about_missing_vars ), provides this in the form unsafe_expr!default_expr. It's not about writing sloppy code, it's precisely the opposite -- identifying clearly and succinctly the regions where missing values are expected. -- Gustavo LopesIt seems that there are no consensus about this feature so... *if in doubt, leave it out.*I don't see any serious objections to it except comments from people that seem not really understand what this feature is about and complain about "bad code" which has nothing to do with the actual feature proposed. I am all for consensus, but I have very hard time accepting it as a valid objection, sorry.