Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.php > #4606

Re: loose thinking

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

Show all headers | View raw


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


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