Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
Those userland solutions (I've written a few myself) send the output as part of the html file that is being composed, or they write it to a file which you then later open up. Which is fine. This takes advantage of the fact that this CLI client, which will *not* be running as a daemon, will have an open terminal window for it for as long as it persists until the process is stopped with CTRL-C. Sending output to that terminal window would be *very* useful in my opinion, hence the call for trace. Essentially, trace is echo to that terminal window, or print_r to that window if it is given an object or array. The userland solutions you mention can later be enhanced to take advantage of this trace function when they are running in the CLI webserver environment if their authors so choose. So can this be done now? Yes and no - Yes in the sense that, with a little creative working around, we can get the debug data. No in that the proposed trace statement has two key properties the userland solutions do not and CANNOT have: 1) It sends to the CLI webserver terminal if one exists. 2) If one does not exist the statement is discarded like comment text. On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:29 PM, David Muir davidkm...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure if this is needed when there are already solutions for this. eg, syslog, error_log, or other userland solutions like Zend_Log, sfLogger, etc. Cheers, David On 19/04/11 23:44, Michael Morris wrote: Pardon me for following up my own post, but there is room for a range of functions here other than trace that could send their output to the command line where the server was started. watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. traceStack() - as trace, but the current stack is reported. traceAll() Return all variables in local scope and the current stack. stop() Halt execution as die or exit, unlike them it's arguments are sent to console instead of browser. On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Michael Morris dmgx.mich...@gmail.com wrote: Since the goal of this is debugging might I suggest borrowing a statement from the Adobe Flash environment: trace. Trace sends output to the debug console. If given a variable it would format it as print_r currently does. When encountered by PHP in other modes it would be silently ignored. Thoughts? On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote: On 04/17/2011 01:17 AM, Philip Olson wrote: Greetings Moriyoshi and all, Are people still thinking about this? And how about applying the current/revised patch to trunk thus making it easier to play with and break, but not freeze its features/API yet. Also the wiki is up again so: - RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/builtinwebserver - Patch is here: http://gist.github.com/835698 The php_http_* namespace is actually already used by pecl_http? Regards, Mike -- 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
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
On 04/20/11 02:05 PM, Michael Morris wrote: This takes advantage of the fact that this CLI client, which will*not* be running as a daemon, will have an open terminal window for it for as long as it persists until the process is stopped with CTRL-C. Sending output to that terminal window would be*very* useful in my opinion, hence the call for trace. Essentially, trace is echo to that terminal window, or print_r to that window if it is given an object or array. error_log() output should go there by default. (didn't check the patch) you can route everything there. I don't think it's good to add tons of extra functions for that. johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
On 2011-04-20, Michael Morris dmgx.mich...@gmail.com wrote: --e0cb4e43cce199248e04a15872c6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Those userland solutions (I've written a few myself) send the output as part of the html file that is being composed, or they write it to a file which you then later open up. Which is fine. This takes advantage of the fact that this CLI client, which will *not* be running as a daemon, will have an open terminal window for it for as long as it persists until the process is stopped with CTRL-C. Sending output to that terminal window would be *very* useful in my opinion, hence the call for trace. Essentially, trace is echo to that terminal window, or print_r to that window if it is given an object or array. I'm going to correct one of your assumptions here, which is or they write it to a file. Zend_Log has an adapter-based approach to log writers. How the writer performs its task is up to the developer. We have writers that write to web services and databases. Our file writer is actually labelled Stream, because it uses streams. This means you can use php://stdout to write to. Additionally, you can have many writers attached to the logger. So, you could have one writing to a file, and another to STDOUT. This is all configurable via a factory. And ZF's solution isn't unique; I've seen other logging solutions that do similarly. My point is: don't dismiss userland solutions out-of-hand; they may offer flexibility that a language-based solution cannot provide. The userland solutions you mention can later be enhanced to take advantage of this trace function when they are running in the CLI webserver environment if their authors so choose. So can this be done now? Yes and no - Yes in the sense that, with a little creative working around, we can get the debug data. No in that the proposed trace statement has two key properties the userland solutions do not and CANNOT have: 1) It sends to the CLI webserver terminal if one exists. 2) If one does not exist the statement is discarded like comment text. As I noted above, you can open a stream to php://stdout. If it's unavailable, the text is basically discarded. On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:29 PM, David Muir davidkm...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure if this is needed when there are already solutions for this. eg, syslog, error_log, or other userland solutions like Zend_Log, sfLogger, etc. Cheers, David On 19/04/11 23:44, Michael Morris wrote: Pardon me for following up my own post, but there is room for a range of functions here other than trace that could send their output to the command line where the server was started. watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. traceStack() - as trace, but the current stack is reported. traceAll() Return all variables in local scope and the current stack. stop() Halt execution as die or exit, unlike them it's arguments are sent to console instead of browser. On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Michael Morris dmgx.mich...@gmail.com wrote: Since the goal of this is debugging might I suggest borrowing a statement from the Adobe Flash environment: trace. Trace sends output to the debug console. If given a variable it would format it as print_r currently does. When encountered by PHP in other modes it would be silently ignored. Thoughts? On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Michael Wallner m...@php.net wrote: On 04/17/2011 01:17 AM, Philip Olson wrote: Greetings Moriyoshi and all, Are people still thinking about this? And how about applying the current/revised patch to trunk thus making it easier to play with and break, but not freeze its features/API yet. Also the wiki is up again so: - RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/builtinwebserver - Patch is here: http://gist.github.com/835698 The php_http_* namespace is actually already used by pecl_http? Regards, Mike -- 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 --e0cb4e43cce199248e04a15872c6-- -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Project Lead| matt...@zend.com Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] SoapServer::handle some times does not call php_end_ob_buffer
Hi all,
In some cases SoapServer::handle does not call php_end_ob_buffer and I can
not call it from php. For example:
class A {
}
$s = new SoapServer(wsdl.wsdl);
$s-setClass(A);
ob_start();
var_dump(ob_get_level()); // int(1)
$s-handle();
var_dump(ob_get_level()); // int(2)
echo ob_get_clean(); // Notice: ob_get_clean(): failed to delete buffer
default output handler
1. When method handle() called without arguments and it is not POST method
2. When unknown compression used or we can't uncompress compressed request.
--
Regards,
Konstantin
Re: [PHP-DEV] SoapServer::handle some times does not call php_end_ob_buffer
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Konstantin Leboev
konstantin.leb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
In some cases SoapServer::handle does not call php_end_ob_buffer and I can
not call it from php. For example:
class A {
}
$s = new SoapServer(wsdl.wsdl);
$s-setClass(A);
ob_start();
var_dump(ob_get_level()); // int(1)
$s-handle();
var_dump(ob_get_level()); // int(2)
echo ob_get_clean(); // Notice: ob_get_clean(): failed to delete buffer
default output handler
1. When method handle() called without arguments and it is not POST method
2. When unknown compression used or we can't uncompress compressed request.
--
Regards,
Konstantin
hi
please report it as a bug on http://bugs.php.net, its easier to keep track
of the problem if its in there.
Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] SoapServer::handle some times does not call php_end_ob_buffer
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Ferenc Kovacs i...@tyrael.hu wrote: please report it as a bug on http://bugs.php.net, its easier to keep track of the problem if its in there. http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=54575 -- Regards, Konstantin
Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
On 17/04/11 9:14 AM, Ángel González wrote: Ben Schmidt wrote: $var = $arr['key'] ?? : 'empty'; Also note this is possible with the recent proposal Hannes and I were discussing. It simply looks like $var = $arr?['key'] ?: 'empty'; The ?[ avoids notices and the ?: works as it always has. Ben. If it was going to be ?[, I'd much prefer $arr['key'?]. It was proposed as $arr[?'key'] instead to avoid a backtracking (would that really be noticeable? I'd prefer readibility), but ?[ would have the same problem. The backtracking issue was part of a different proposal where a ternary operator had an optional 'else' part. It is not an issue with notice-free array lookups as more recently proposed, and I see no reason we couldn't use ?[ or [? or ?] as the syntax. In all cases, either that combination of characters can be scanned as a single token, or the parsing can be done with just one token of lookahead and no backtracking. I don't know what kind of parser PHP uses, though, so I'm just guessing; but AFAICT any standard kind of parser shouldn't have much trouble here. The one argument I can find for favouring ?[ or [? is that this generalises more naturally. Perhaps [? is the best. It generalises nicely if required: $array[?'key'] $?variable $object-?property I personally only think we need the first one, but there are a few votes for the second, too. I personally also don't care very much about the syntax; I'd be equally happy with $array['key'?] or $array?['key']. I'm just keen to have the functionality (and separately, the !==null operator(s)). Ben. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
On 04/19/11 15:44, Michael Morris wrote: watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. Just my 0.02 as a user, but it strikes me that watch() could be a handy addition that would be difficult and/or extremely painful to do in userland. Dave -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
On 04/20/11 04:18 PM, Dave Ingram wrote: On 04/19/11 15:44, Michael Morris wrote: watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. Just my 0.02 as a user, but it strikes me that watch() could be a handy addition that would be difficult and/or extremely painful to do in userland. ... but this can be relatively easily be done in a debug extension and that's where this belongs. johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
On 20 April 2011 15:18, Dave Ingram d...@dmi.me.uk wrote: On 04/19/11 15:44, Michael Morris wrote: watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. Just my 0.02 as a user, but it strikes me that watch() could be a handy addition that would be difficult and/or extremely painful to do in userland. Dave Being able to watch($var [, ...]), unwatch($var [, ...]) and trace([bool $start = true]) without a debugger in userland ... Just like you can overload session handling logic by using session_set_save_handler(), would something like ... bool debugging_set_handler(callback $watch, callback $unwatch, callback $trace); be of use? -- Richard Quadling Twitter : EE : Zend @RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: built-in web server in CLI.
2011/4/20 Johannes Schlüter johan...@schlueters.de: On 04/20/11 04:18 PM, Dave Ingram wrote: On 04/19/11 15:44, Michael Morris wrote: watch ($var) - $var is sent to the console on the line this statement is made with the statment now watching 'var'.. init value x, and then each time it changes it is updated in the console. Just my 0.02 as a user, but it strikes me that watch() could be a handy addition that would be difficult and/or extremely painful to do in userland. ... but this can be relatively easily be done in a debug extension and that's where this belongs. johannes If the extension could allow for userland interpretation of the debug events ... then I think that's the best of all worlds. -- Richard Quadling Twitter : EE : Zend @RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
Hi,
This proposal is for the often called line like this:
$var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : '';
Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same:
$var = varset($_GET['var']);
The implementation for this in PHP code is this:
# Arg 1 = the variable to check for existence
# Arg 2 = the default return value which is an empty string by default
function varset($var, $default = '')
{
return (isset($var) ? $var : $default);
}
However there is a slight issue with this approach. If notices are turned on
this code will generate a notice while i think it should not do that. But
perhaps this approach is to short.
A slightly different implementation (and longer) prevents the notice:
# Arg 1 = the array in which a given key should be checked for existence
# Arg 2 = the key to check in the array from arg 1
# Arg 3 = the default return value which is an empty string by default
function varset($arr, $key, $default = '')
{
return (isset($arr[$key]) ? $arr[$key] : $default);
}
where the call would be:
$var = varset($_GET, 'var');
I personally like both ways...
My proposal is to make this function a core php function in PHP 5.4. The
added benifit is obvious. People can, with this, use a way shorter notation
to validate if a given array element exists. Right now that needs to be done
with a ternary, filter_var or some other method (there are quite a few ways
to check for existence).
I tried to look in the PHP source to see if i could make a patch to add this
but i couldn't find the function that defines the isset function (i wanted
to base it on that). So a pointer to the right location would be nice (along
with docs that tell me what i all need to do to implement a new php
function). If someone else wants to make the implementation, please be my
guest :)
So, what do you think of this?
Regards,
Mark
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 04:55:00PM +0200, Mark wrote: Hi, This proposal is for the often called line like this: $var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : ''; Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same: $var = varset($_GET['var']); It should be called var_set() - better on name space pollution. However there is a slight issue with this approach. If notices are turned on this code will generate a notice while i think it should not do that. But perhaps this approach is to short. A slightly different implementation (and longer) prevents the notice: If is is a language element (like isset()) then you can avoid this problem. I do find a lot of code, in simple scripts, that does just that. It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Alain Williams a...@phcomp.co.uk wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 04:55:00PM +0200, Mark wrote: Hi, This proposal is for the often called line like this: $var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : ''; Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same: $var = varset($_GET['var']); It should be called var_set() - better on name space pollution. oke However there is a slight issue with this approach. If notices are turned on this code will generate a notice while i think it should not do that. But perhaps this approach is to short. A slightly different implementation (and longer) prevents the notice: If is is a language element (like isset()) then you can avoid this problem. Could you explain that a bit more? I do find a lot of code, in simple scripts, that does just that. It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); I might be missing the point here, but the way i understand it that can give unexpected results.. since it returns the first element from an array in your suggestion but that's not what you want to do. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 05:19:36PM +0200, Mark wrote: If is is a language element (like isset()) then you can avoid this problem. Could you explain that a bit more? It looks like a function but is not: http://uk3.php.net/manual/en/function.isset.php It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); I might be missing the point here, but the way i understand it that can give unexpected results.. since it returns the first element from an array in your suggestion but that's not what you want to do. I mean that it checks $_GET['var'], then $_POST['var'] returns the first of the two that is set or 'default'. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed Apr 20 10:55 AM, Mark wrote:
function varset($arr, $key, $default = '') { return (isset($arr[$key])
? $arr[$key] : $default); }
where the call would be:
$var = varset($_GET, 'var');
I personally like both ways...
My proposal is to make this function a core php function in PHP 5.4.
The added benifit is obvious. People can, with this, use a way shorter
notation to validate if a given array element exists. Right now that
needs to be done with a ternary, filter_var or some other method
(there are quite a few ways to check for existence).
I tried to look in the PHP source to see if i could make a patch to
add this but i couldn't find the function that defines the isset
function (i wanted to base it on that). So a pointer to the right
location would be nice (along with docs that tell me what i all need
to do to implement a new php function).
https://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_language_parser.y?rev
ision=306938view=markup
Look for isset_variables:, then zend_do_isset_or_isempty
isset() lives in the parser and requires some advanced knowledge of the
opcodes (personally I'm not there yet)
So, what do you think of this?
I like the idea, it could also be called vardef() or var_default()
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); If that is the usage, I would suggest coalesce() to be consistent with the same concept in SQL. And you would not need a list as the first argument. Just pass multiple arguments and return the first set value. $var = var_set($_GET['var'], $_POST['var'], 'default'); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_%28SQL%29#COALESCE Brian. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Brian Moon wrote: It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); If that is the usage, I would suggest coalesce() to be consistent with the same concept in SQL. And you would not need a list as the first argument. Just pass multiple arguments and return the first set value. $var = var_set($_GET['var'], $_POST['var'], 'default'); Even better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_%28SQL%29#COALESCE -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] PECL: mysqlnd_ms (Load-Balancing)
http://pecl.php.net/package/mysqlnd_ms/download/1.0.0/ This is a really great idea to use replication-salves for read-access without touch the php-application and if this will work with php_flag site-specific using the available slaves automatically / leave them out if they are stopped this can make many setups very scaleable and much more efficient as do the work in php-scripts with all the needed decisions read-query, which mysql-host and is the host currently available I think this would be finally a thing to directly include in mysqlnd and leave default off The replication and load balancing plugin is a plugin for the mysqlnd library. It can be used with PHP MySQL extensions (ext/mysql, ext/mysqli, PDO_MySQL). if they are compiled to use mysqlnd. The plugin inspects queries to do read-write splitting. Read-only queries are send to configured MySQL replication slave servers all other queries are redirected to the MySQL replication master server. Very little, if any, application changes required, dependent on the usage scenario required. -- Reindl Harald the lounge interactive design GmbH A-1060 Vienna, Hofmühlgasse 17 CTO / software-development / cms-solutions p: +43 (1) 595 3999 33, m: +43 (676) 40 221 40 icq: 154546673, http://www.thelounge.net/ http://www.thelounge.net/signature.asc.what.htm signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
This discussion is equivalent to the one that we just had. Read the thread [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator. Also the $var = var_set($_GET['var'], $_POST['var'], 'default'); syntax you propose would be equivalent to (as per previous discussion): $var = $_GET[?'var'] $: $_POST[?'var'] $: 'default'; (The syntax might also be [?'var'], ['var'?] or different). On 20 April 2011 18:19, Alain Williams a...@phcomp.co.uk wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Brian Moon wrote: It might be nice to extend it such that if the 1st argument is a list then the first in the list which is set is returned, eg: $var = var_set(($_GET['var'], $_POST['var']), 'default'); If that is the usage, I would suggest coalesce() to be consistent with the same concept in SQL. And you would not need a list as the first argument. Just pass multiple arguments and return the first set value. $var = var_set($_GET['var'], $_POST['var'], 'default'); Even better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_%28SQL%29#COALESCE -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include std_disclaimer.h -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Hannes Landeholm landeh...@gmail.comwrote: This discussion is equivalent to the one that we just had. Read the thread [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator. except that it wouldn't bring new syntax. ps: please don't top post if everybody else does bottom or inline posting, it's hard to follow. Tyrael
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Jonathan Bond-Caron jbo...@openmv.comwrote:
On Wed Apr 20 10:55 AM, Mark wrote:
function varset($arr, $key, $default = '') { return (isset($arr[$key])
? $arr[$key] : $default); }
where the call would be:
$var = varset($_GET, 'var');
I personally like both ways...
My proposal is to make this function a core php function in PHP 5.4.
The added benifit is obvious. People can, with this, use a way shorter
notation to validate if a given array element exists. Right now that
needs to be done with a ternary, filter_var or some other method
(there are quite a few ways to check for existence).
I tried to look in the PHP source to see if i could make a patch to
add this but i couldn't find the function that defines the isset
function (i wanted to base it on that). So a pointer to the right
location would be nice (along with docs that tell me what i all need
to do to implement a new php function).
https://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/Zend/zend_language_parser.y?rev
ision=306938view=markup
Look for isset_variables:, then zend_do_isset_or_isempty
isset() lives in the parser and requires some advanced knowledge of the
opcodes (personally I'm not there yet)
Oh boy, i never ever did anything in the core PHP coding so i'm certainly
not likely to be able to understand all of that. (yet)
So, what do you think of this?
I like the idea, it could also be called vardef() or var_default()
@ the rest.
The list idea is nice, but i don't really see the added value for it.. Lets
keep it simple, oke :)
As for that other thread: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on
short-ternary operator
I don't really know much of it, but does that mean that my suggestion is
rejected even before i made an RFC for it?
Regards,
Mark
Re: [PHP-DEV] Function proposal: varset
On 4/20/11 9:55 AM, Mark wrote:
Hi,
This proposal is for the often called line like this:
$var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : '';
Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same:
$var = varset($_GET['var']);
The implementation for this in PHP code is this:
# Arg 1 = the variable to check for existence
# Arg 2 = the default return value which is an empty string by default
function varset($var, $default = '')
{
return (isset($var) ? $var : $default);
}
I proposed something similar over 5 years ago. It ain't gonna happen
because PHP language can't support it. The Zend engine needs to be
rewritten to remove the warnings and that's not something they are
volunteering to do no matter how much people want it.
http://markmail.org/message/yl26ebzcix35wtke
My proposal was called filled since it was the opposite of empty
which already existed. I extended the function to return the first
non-empty value or null if all values evaluated as empty.
You could use the function like this:
$x = filled($_GET['x'], $obj-something, $default, 'default');
It would return the first argument where !empty($arg) evaluates as TRUE.
There would need to be a companion function to check 'isset' opposite as
you have proposed.
Like I said, though, I don't think this can be done in the language
because I think they ran out of OPCODES and would have to tear apart the
whole PHP engine to support such a feature.
-- Dante
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP-DEV] Re: Function proposal: varset
On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, D. Dante Lorenso da...@lorenso.com wrote:
On 4/20/11 9:55 AM, Mark wrote:
Hi,
This proposal is for the often called line like this:
$var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : '';
Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same:
$var = varset($_GET['var']);
The implementation for this in PHP code is this:
# Arg 1 = the variable to check for existence
# Arg 2 = the default return value which is an empty string by default
function varset($var, $default = '')
{
return (isset($var) ? $var : $default);
}
I proposed something similar over 5 years ago. It ain't gonna happen because
PHP language can't support it. The Zend engine needs to be rewritten to
remove the warnings and that's not something they are volunteering to do no
matter how much people want it.
http://markmail.org/message/yl26ebzcix35wtke
My proposal was called filled since it was the opposite of empty which
already existed. I extended the function to return the first non-empty value
or null if all values evaluated as empty.
You could use the function like this:
$x = filled($_GET['x'], $obj-something, $default, 'default');
It would return the first argument where !empty($arg) evaluates as TRUE.
There would need to be a companion function to check 'isset' opposite as you
have proposed.
Like I said, though, I don't think this can be done in the language because I
think they ran out of OPCODES and would have to tear apart the whole PHP
engine to support such a feature.
-- Dante
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi,
well, i did propose 2 possible ways although the second one is a
little longer but still clean and readable.
And the second one is certainly possible to implement!
Btw. i did look at the suggested core php code parts and even though i
can do nearly everything in php.. i have a hard time understanding how
the inner php parsing things actually work. There is no way i'm able
to make a patch for php.
Regards,
Mark
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Function proposal: varset
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Mark mark...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, D. Dante Lorenso da...@lorenso.com wrote:
On 4/20/11 9:55 AM, Mark wrote:
Hi,
This proposal is for the often called line like this:
$var = isset($_GET['var']) ? $_GET['var'] : '';
Only a shorter and imho a cleaner solution to get the same:
$var = varset($_GET['var']);
The implementation for this in PHP code is this:
# Arg 1 = the variable to check for existence
# Arg 2 = the default return value which is an empty string by default
function varset($var, $default = '')
{
return (isset($var) ? $var : $default);
}
I proposed something similar over 5 years ago. It ain't gonna happen
because PHP language can't support it. The Zend engine needs to be
rewritten to remove the warnings and that's not something they are
volunteering to do no matter how much people want it.
http://markmail.org/message/yl26ebzcix35wtke
My proposal was called filled since it was the opposite of empty which
already existed. I extended the function to return the first non-empty
value or null if all values evaluated as empty.
You could use the function like this:
$x = filled($_GET['x'], $obj-something, $default, 'default');
It would return the first argument where !empty($arg) evaluates as TRUE.
There would need to be a companion function to check 'isset' opposite as you
have proposed.
Like I said, though, I don't think this can be done in the language because
I think they ran out of OPCODES and would have to tear apart the whole PHP
engine to support such a feature.
-- Dante
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi,
well, i did propose 2 possible ways although the second one is a
little longer but still clean and readable.
And the second one is certainly possible to implement!
Btw. i did look at the suggested core php code parts and even though i
can do nearly everything in php.. i have a hard time understanding how
the inner php parsing things actually work. There is no way i'm able
to make a patch for php.
Regards,
Mark
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Hi,
As Hannes said, the other thread discussing this feature (although the
subject line may suggest otherwise) is still active, so please move
this discussion there:
[PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
Cheers,
Arpad
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Hannes Landeholm landeh...@gmail.com wrote: Some suggested that the ternary if comparison should suppress the notice automatically. This would break existing code and also be confusing since people expect a ternary if and normal if to work the same way. Some suggested ?? as an array access operator that suppresses the notice and has 3 variants: A: nothing specified - uses null as default, B: has default specified, C: returns X if index exists or Y if index doesn't exist. This effectively solves the code duplication problem and is a shortcut for saying the array index may or may not exist. One person said that the relation between ? and ?? and == and === would make the operator non-intuitive. Other people disagreed and claimed the opposite. So basically the discussion now is what exact characters that should be used to represent this operator? I really hope we can get this implemented quickly... I worked with $_POST yesterday and I could really use that ?? operator. Hi, I must say that the prospect of yet more new syntax is scary. It really looks like Perl, and I wouldn't have the slightest clue what it meant if I'd missed the release notes. I've pined for something like coalesce($_GET['foo'], $defaults['foo'], 42) for years, and I think that style is far more in keeping with the PHP ethos, and far more readily understandable than this suggested new syntax. If I've missed some argument against this then please correct me. Regards, Arpad -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Arpad Ray array...@gmail.com wrote: I've pined for something like coalesce($_GET['foo'], $defaults['foo'], 42) for years, and I think that style is far more in keeping with the PHP ethos, and far more readily understandable than this suggested new syntax. To elaborate, I'd probably think this code was an unlikely series of typos, or an encoding error: $var = $_GET[?'var'] $: $_POST[?'var'] $: 'default'; But as a PHP coder, I'm quite familiar with how coalesce() works. Regards, Arpad -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset/isempty check on short-ternary operator
On 21/04/11 08:56, Arpad Ray wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Hannes Landeholm landeh...@gmail.com wrote: Some suggested that the ternary if comparison should suppress the notice automatically. This would break existing code and also be confusing since people expect a ternary if and normal if to work the same way. Some suggested ?? as an array access operator that suppresses the notice and has 3 variants: A: nothing specified - uses null as default, B: has default specified, C: returns X if index exists or Y if index doesn't exist. This effectively solves the code duplication problem and is a shortcut for saying the array index may or may not exist. One person said that the relation between ? and ?? and == and === would make the operator non-intuitive. Other people disagreed and claimed the opposite. So basically the discussion now is what exact characters that should be used to represent this operator? I really hope we can get this implemented quickly... I worked with $_POST yesterday and I could really use that ?? operator. Hi, I must say that the prospect of yet more new syntax is scary. It really looks like Perl, and I wouldn't have the slightest clue what it meant if I'd missed the release notes. I've pined for something like coalesce($_GET['foo'], $defaults['foo'], 42) for years, and I think that style is far more in keeping with the PHP ethos, and far more readily understandable than this suggested new syntax. If I've missed some argument against this then please correct me. Regards, Arpad What does coalesce() do? If I'm guessing correctly, would proposal #2 that Rune Kaagaard put up solve that for you? https://gist.github.com/909711 Cheers, David -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
