Lester Caine wrote on 23/09/2015 13:22:
NOW WE AGREE ;)
Simply because I DON'T want call 'isset() and is_null()' what*I* need
is is_exist() which is the missing function. THEN either of the other is
redundant, but neither replaces the check that the variable actually
exists and it's that which prevents a clean program flow.
Absolutely.
To be clear, my position is no longer that you are "wrong" to want this
function, only that your need for it is unusual, and not what most
people are looking for when they use isset().
That's why I propose a function of "variable_exists(string
$variable_name): boolean" for those cases where code is working with
dynamic variable names, in the same way as function_exists() and
class_exists() support working with dynamic definitions and autoloading.
If you
read more rows YES they will have the same set of columns but there is
nothing demanding that every column in the database is actually returned
in every query? Only returning the subset needed for the job is
perfectly sensible and there are a number of ways that can happen
OK, that makes sense.
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]
