Regards,
Shelley
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Butera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 12:03 AM
To: Jochem Maas
Cc: php-general@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP] A stupid question?
On Jan 18, 2008 10:49 AM, Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Eric Butera schreef:
> > On Jan 18, 2008 9:31 AM, Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Eric Butera schreef:
> >>> On Jan 17, 2008 9:54 PM, Shelley Shyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe this is a somehow stupid question.
> >>>>
> >>>> I want to know how php could know whether session_start() has been
> >>>> called, that is, whether session has been started.
> >>>>
> >>>> I Googled, but got little help.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for help!
> >>>> Any tip is greatly appreciated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Shelley
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> One other thing is you won't be able to start a session if headers
> >>> have been sent. It is a good idea to use output buffering to help
> >>> aid with this.
> >> no it's not a good idea to use output bufferin to 'help aid' this.
> >> instead write code that is logically structured so that the
> >> initialization of your pages/app/scripts occurs BEFORE any output is
> >> generated.
> >>
> >> to avoid spurious output of whitespace avoid including the trailing
> >> '?>' is included php[-only] files. (and ignore whatever Tedd says
> >> on the subject ;-)
> >>
> >>> If headers have been sent you'll get a nasty warning.
> >> if (headers_sent()) {
> >> echo "oops!";
> >> }
> >>
> >> use code to avoid warnings.
> >>
> >>
> >>> It can be a php.ini setting or you can simply call ob_start() on
> >>> the first line of your script.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > I agree with you that it is ideal to do what you're saying but it
> > isn't always 100% practical. Sometimes the stuff we work on is
> > handed down and in our purist world we'd like to change it, but
> > can't. So I think that you should recommend best practices for
> > future creations, but blindly shooting down all alternatives isn't
> > right. My solution would get the job done rather than the OP
> > refactoring the pages and not getting paid for it. It would work
> > and over time things could be tidied up on future revisions over time.
>
> still, it's not a good idea because that implies a concept that you
> are wanting to apply. you don't want to use output buffering if you can help
> it.
>
> output buffering to overcome output being created before headers are
> [conditionally] sent in badly written code is a viable hack given
> certain budgetary and/or time constraints.
>
> what I'm saying is it's a viable solution to a immediate problem for
> which you don't have the time/money to fix properly - it's more than
> fine to enlighted the OP as such, I just don't think calling it a good
> idea is the right thing to do - it gives the impression that your
> giving it the seal-of-good-coding-practice-approval, and the OP might
> just take your word for it.
>
> > Also, if you do what you've said and created your logic 100%
> > perfectly, there should never be any use for headers_sent(), right?
> > Headers shouldn't have been sent until you've specifically sent them.
>
> true, and they are not - but if you want to be sure to avoid cruft in
> the output and/or shit in the logs you program defensively for those
> occasions where somebody [else?] makes a mistake of some kind.
>
>Fair enough, you win! :)
Thank you all. Thank you very much. :-)
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
