Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #4606
| Message-ID | <2028906.az0AgUPcgG@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | 2012-01-25 04:49 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: loose thinking |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.php |
| References | <9o7h5fFu6rU1@mid.uni-berlin.de> <jfma85$qmb$1@dont-email.me> <9o7q84F33fU1@mid.uni-berlin.de> <slrnjhtf9j.51n.hellsop@nibelheim.ninehells.com> |
| Followup-To | comp.lang.php |
Followups directed to: comp.lang.php
Peter H. Coffin wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:32:52 +0100, M. Strobel wrote: >> Okay I see it is well documented. I just started testing. >> >> I am angry about it because not even isset() respects the null value >> here. I think it makes more sense this way: isset($a[null]) should >> return false, because there is no null index. > > Parens change precedence. Even on functions. You are missing the point, which is: `null' is being converted to the primitive string value ''. A key of an *associative* array may be the empty string. And that is good so. What is questionable here is the implicit type conversion of non-numeric values to string. But PHP is not alone there, so this behavior can be expected. It might be nice if E_STRICT reported such spurious conversions or there was an even stricter mode that forbade them. Perhaps in PHP 6 … PointedEars -- Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site. (This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one will want to steal it.) -- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm> (404-comp.)
Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 11:57 +0100
Re: loose thinking "Álvaro G. Vicario" <alvaro.NOSPAMTHANX@demogracia.com.invalid> - 2012-01-24 14:04 +0100
Re: loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 14:32 +0100
Re: loose thinking The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-24 13:41 +0000
Re: loose thinking Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 09:35 -0500
Re: loose thinking "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2012-01-24 08:16 -0600
Re: loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 17:35 +0100
Re: loose thinking The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-24 16:59 +0000
Re: loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 19:11 +0100
Re: loose thinking Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-25 04:49 +0100
Re: loose thinking "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2012-01-25 07:58 -0600
Re: loose thinking Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-25 20:37 +0100
Re: loose thinking "Álvaro G. Vicario" <alvaro.NOSPAMTHANX@demogracia.com.invalid> - 2012-01-24 16:20 +0100
Re: loose thinking The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-24 15:43 +0000
Re: loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 19:43 +0100
Re: loose thinking Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-24 17:02 +0100
Re: loose thinking "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-24 17:28 +0100
csiph-web