Re: [RFC] Implicit isset() in Shorthand Ternary Operator

From: Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 07:58:02 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] Implicit isset() in Shorthand Ternary Operator
References: 1  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-77097@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Hi, Andrea I feel more like Sherif Ramadan. Even so I've quite often been in the same situation, I don't think it's a good solution to change something like that, just for the shorthand-operator. I think, the notice is really valuable when accessing the value and doing something with it - like myFunction($_GET['not_set']), but if you're just checking for the existence, I, too, think it is more annoying. My way was to suppress it by adding the silence-operator ;) I always used like: @$_GET['mykey'] ?: ”” I can't come up with a good mid-way right now, but I don't think it's a good way to change this ONLY for the short-hand operator. Bye, Simon On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 2:02 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote: > Good evening, > > I’ve written an RFC and working patch which attempt to add this feature > which has been often requested: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/isset_ternary > > Thanks! > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ > > > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >

« previous php.internals (#77097) next »