if(any_empty($var1, $var2, $var3)) return "there's an empty var";
if(!any_empty($var1, $var2, $var3)) return "there's no empty vars";
if (all_set($var1, $var2, $var3)) return "all vars are set";
if (!all_set($var1, $var2, $var3)) return "there's an unset var";
but how would you find out which var's, if any, are empty or not set?
otherwise, would seem not very useful...
if(!all_set($var1, $var2, $var3)){
if(!isset($var1)){
echo 'it was 1';
}
if(!isset($var2)){
echo 'it was 2';
}
if(!isset($var3)){
echo 'it was 3';
}
}
On Thu, October 21, 2004 9:13 am, Ron Korving said:
> I'm not really anxcious to have an anyempty() function, but I do think
> empty() should behalve like an allempty() just like isset() behaves like
> an
> areallset(). I guess the "weirdness" is in the fact that isset() will give
> a
> positive reply when something exists, while empty() gives a negative reply
> when something exists. I guess this creates the confusion and would make
> the
> allempty() functionality less likely to be used often. I guess people will
> want to check more often if all their vars are set, and therefor an "or"
> situation instead of "and" would be more suitable, because then you could
> do: if (empty($var1, $var2, $var3)) echo "there's an empty var";
> I'd personally prefer the "and" situation, but it's a fact that this would
> make it far less useful than the "or". So I can see the confusion and the
> reason to just stick with 1 parameter.
>
> I guess there should just be a function like isset() which returns
> !empty().
> Maybe it should be called isval() or something. Then it could be used for
> several vars without confusion:
> if (!isval($var1, $var2, $var3)) return "there's an empty var";
>
> This would make sense to everybody I think, because like isset() it would
> be
> an "and" situation.
>
> Ron
>
>
> "Jevon Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> How about anyempty($var1, $var2, $var3, ...) ?
>>
>> Jevon
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ron Korving" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 12:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] suggestion: empty() with infinite parameters like
>> isset()
>>
>>
>> > Maybe it was a bad example. Writing "data missing" I was thinking that
> at
>> > least one variable should be set.
>> >
>> > Ron
>> >
>> > "Derick Rethans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Ron Korving wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Okay, I don't wanna make remarks that may have already been made
>> > earlier,
>> > > > but I think it should be "all should be empty", because it works
>> exactly
>> > the
>> > > > same for isset(), and apparently, a decision was made to give
> isset()
>> > that
>> > > > feature.
>> > >
>> > > Right, but then your example would already no longer have worked:
>> > >
>> > > if (empty($var1, $var2, $var3)) echo "data missing";
>> > >
>> > > so there is no point in adding it like that.
>> > >
>> > > Derick
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Derick Rethans
>> > > http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org
>> >
>> > --
>> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> >
>> >
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
