Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #30602
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript, comp.lang.php |
| Subject | Re: not "autovivification", but ...? |
| Followup-To | comp.lang.php |
| Date | 2016-06-02 02:16 +0200 |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Message-ID | <6429329.X1ROTxqqWj@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <nik0k5$8mu$1@news.albasani.net> <1dc7bd11-343d-4cbb-b75d-1db8516666a0@googlegroups.com> <nin783$9qu$1@news.albasani.net> <d7cf47ca-3871-46e0-8434-b17ec1fe1440@googlegroups.com> <ninr5k$gee$1@news.albasani.net> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Followups directed to: comp.lang.php
Stefan Weiss wrote:
> PS, a little off-topic: PHP is probably the worst language to work with in
> this regard. It will happily allow implicit multi-level creation in arrays
> -
>
> // ($foo is unused up to this point)
> $foo["bar"][13]["baz"] = "qux";
This is so very useful. (No sarcasm.)
> - but will emit E_NOTICE (a type of error)
A common misonception. It is a kind of debug message instead and can be
suppressed in various ways.
> if we try to read a nonexistent index ($foo["x"]).
^^^^^
The proper term is _key_, and if you write
@$foo["x"]
the notice will go away without any extra configuration.
F'up2 comp.lang.php
--
PointedEars (ZCE PHP)
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 14:38 +0200
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-06-01 08:03 -0700
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 19:49 +0200
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-06-01 14:29 -0700
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:29 +0200
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-02 02:16 +0200
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 13:20 +0200
Re: not "autovivification", but ...? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-06-02 15:51 -0700
csiph-web