Re: Re: Allowing is_* functions to accept multiple parameters

I like the naming convention of are_*. For me personally it isn't directly intuitive that the multiple parameters of is_* would be compared with an && and not an ||. On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Sean Coates <sean@seancoates.com> wrote: > > i.e. is_null($a, $b, $c) would be the same as is_null($a) && is_null($b) > > && is_null($c) > > Note that this would not be semantically equivalent in this form, even if > is_null() did accept multiple parameters, because of the > short-circuiting > with &&: > > <?php > > function are_null() { > foreach (func_get_args() as $a) { > if ($a !== null) { > return false; > } > } > return true; > } > > function destroy_data() { echo "DESTROYING DATA\n"; } > > // old form: short-circuited; data is not destroyed > if (is_null(null) && is_null(false) && is_null(destroy_data())) { > echo "All null.\n"; > } else { > echo "Not null.\n"; > } > > echo "----\n"; > > // proposed form: no short-circuit; parameters are evaluated at call time > and data is destroyed > if (are_null(null, false, destroy_data())) { > echo "Still null.\n"; > } else { > echo "Still not null.\n"; > } > >