I don't think that in that context, that semantics makes much
sense. isset() for multiple variables as a 'all or nothing' checking
method makes sense. But if you want to know which variable failed, use
multiple isset()'s.
As for negative numbers, they are and are to stay boolean true values.
Zeev
At 10:07 19/3/2001, Chris Newbill wrote:
>Oh come on Andi, are you telling me you can't do everything at once?
>
>Yes, I don't care about which one is the non-set variable. I'd be glad to
>help on making this function work like that, but I'm afraid my C is rusty
>enough to require Tetanus shots for everyone involved. :) (Okay so it isn't
>really that bad.)
>
>Well, I remember reading that someone suggested making it so that any
>negative number was false. So if that was the case and I did the following:
>
>$a = 1;
>$b = 2;
>$d = 4;
>
>$play_nice = isSet($a, $b, $c, $d);
>
>if (!$play_nice) {
> print "The variable missing is in position ";
> print ($play_nice*-1);
>}
>
>And it would print 3, in which case we would know $c is not set. I'm not
>that sure about this approach, seems like a hack, but the
>I-don't-care-which-one-isn't-set approach seems fine to me.
>
>Maybe a poll?
>
>(X) Extend the isset() and empty() functions to encompass multiple
> variables as one inclusive logic test.
>( ) Don't touch my beloved functionality vile creatures!
>
>-Chris
>
> > From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] feature request
> >
> >
> > It should be possible to do this. I'll look into it. But I also need to
> > think about how much sense it makes :)
> > Today you're asking for isset(...,...,...). Tomorrow you will ask to know
> > which one was not set if it failed.
> > So I hope what youreally want is only the first.
> >
> > Andi
> >
> > At 09:42 PM 3/18/2001 -0500, Mike Robinson wrote:
> > >Chris Newbill writes:
> > >
> > > > This would not be a bad idea IMHO and I would use it for some things.
> > > >
> > > > The functionality would be inclusive not exclusive. So
> > > > isset($var1, $var2,
> > > > $var3) would only return true if $var1, $var2, and $var3 are
> > set and false
> > > > otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > So If I had a form passing $name, $email, $phone:
> > > >
> > > > example #1
> > > > if (isSet($name, $email, $phone))
> > > > // ALL GOOD
> > > >
> > > > Instead of
> > > >
> > > > example #2
> > > > if ((isSet($name)) &&
> > > > (isSet($email)) &&
> > > > (isSet($phone)))
> > > > // ALL GOOD
> > > >
> > > > Granted if one variable wasn't set, then you might run into some minor
> > > > issues if you want to figure out which one is not set. But
> > that is the
> > > > developers choice. :)
> > > >
> > > > It wouldn't break existing functionality, seems simple enough
> > to implement
> > > > (although my karma is limited to doc's so someone else would have
> > > > to do it),
> > > > and would make some people happy. That seems to be reason enough
> > > > to do it.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 2 cents.
> > >
> > >Ditto.
> > >It would be handy. If you are willing and able to do
> > >stuff like this, maybe a request for additional karma
> > >would be in order.
> > >
> > >Mike Robinson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>--
>PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CTO & co-founder, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
