php-general Digest 24 Feb 2010 16:14:58 -0000 Issue 6607
Topics (messages 302330 through 302349):
PHP or SQL to do this?
302330 by: Rob Gould
302332 by: Jim Lucas
302342 by: Ian
Re: PHP / mySQL Project... Real men use 'cat'
302331 by: Jim Lucas
302336 by: shiplu
302337 by: Pete Ford
302338 by: Ashley Sheridan
302345 by: Andrew Ballard
302346 by: Ashley Sheridan
302347 by: Ashley Sheridan
Re: How to get the 'return type' of a function?
302333 by: Dasn
302334 by: Jochem Maas
Re: $_POST vs $_REQUEST
302335 by: Jochem Maas
302339 by: Ashley Sheridan
302340 by: Rene Veerman
302341 by: Ashley Sheridan
obj in array?
302343 by: Kim Madsen
302344 by: Kim Madsen
Re: Fun with Streams
302348 by: Matt Neimeyer
HipHop and other PHP compiler performance evaluation
302349 by: Manuel Lemos
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-subscr...@lists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-unsubscr...@lists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-gene...@lists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
I'm not sure if I need to write a PHP for-loop to do this, or if it can all be
done in one SQL statement?
Basically, I want to copy all the barcodes from one table and put them into
another table, but only if the barcode in the first table > 0, and only if the
wineid's match from table to table.
Steps individually are something like this:
1) First, I get all the records from the "wine" table that have barcodes, like
this:
SELECT * FROM `wine` WHERE barcode2 > 0
The fields I need are "barcode2", and "wineid"
2) Next, I need to match all the wineid's from this "wine" table with the wine
id's from the "usersdata" table. Both fields in both tables are called
"wineid".
3) Then, if the wineid's match, I need to copy the "barcode2" value from the
wine table and put it into the field "custombarcode" in the "usersdata" table.
I'm tempted to write a PHP script which does a while-loop through all the
records returned from the wine table and do the matching with the usersdata
table, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of table-join-type
query that can do all this in one step.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rob Gould wrote:
I'm not sure if I need to write a PHP for-loop to do this, or if it can all be
done in one SQL statement?
Basically, I want to copy all the barcodes from one table and put them into
another table, but only if the barcode in the first table > 0, and only if the
wineid's match from table to table.
Steps individually are something like this:
1) First, I get all the records from the "wine" table that have barcodes, like
this:
SELECT * FROM `wine` WHERE barcode2 > 0
The fields I need are "barcode2", and "wineid"
2) Next, I need to match all the wineid's from this "wine" table with the wine id's from the
"usersdata" table. Both fields in both tables are called "wineid".
3) Then, if the wineid's match, I need to copy the "barcode2" value from the wine table and put it
into the field "custombarcode" in the "usersdata" table.
I'm tempted to write a PHP script which does a while-loop through all the
records returned from the wine table and do the matching with the usersdata
table, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of table-join-type
query that can do all this in one step.
Looks like you should be able to do this in the SQL. Creating a dummy DB and testing, the following
seems to do the trick.
UPDATE usersdata SET
custombarcode = (
SELECT barcode2
FROM wine
WHERE usersdata.wineid = wine.wineid
AND wine.barcode2 > 0
)
Here is the DB schema and data that I used for the test
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `usersdata` (
`id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`wineid` int(11) NOT NULL,
`custombarcode` int(11) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 COLLATE=latin1_bin AUTO_INCREMENT=7 ;
INSERT INTO `usersdata` (`id`, `wineid`, `custombarcode`) VALUES
(1, 1, 0),
(2, 2, 0),
(3, 3, 0),
(4, 4, 0),
(5, 1, 0),
(6, 1, 0);
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `wine` (
`wineid` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment,
`barcode2` int(11) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`wineid`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 COLLATE=latin1_bin AUTO_INCREMENT=4 ;
INSERT INTO `wine` (`wineid`, `barcode2`) VALUES
(1, 5),
(2, -5),
(3, 10);
--
Jim Lucas
A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 24/02/2010 05:46, Rob Gould wrote:
> I'm not sure if I need to write a PHP for-loop to do this, or if it can all
> be done in one SQL statement?
>
> Basically, I want to copy all the barcodes from one table and put them into
> another table, but only if the barcode in the first table > 0, and only if
> the wineid's match from table to table.
>
>
> Steps individually are something like this:
>
> 1) First, I get all the records from the "wine" table that have barcodes,
> like this:
>
> SELECT * FROM `wine` WHERE barcode2 > 0
>
> The fields I need are "barcode2", and "wineid"
>
>
> 2) Next, I need to match all the wineid's from this "wine" table with the
> wine id's from the "usersdata" table. Both fields in both tables are called
> "wineid".
>
> 3) Then, if the wineid's match, I need to copy the "barcode2" value from the
> wine table and put it into the field "custombarcode" in the "usersdata" table.
>
>
> I'm tempted to write a PHP script which does a while-loop through all the
> records returned from the wine table and do the matching with the usersdata
> table, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of table-join-type
> query that can do all this in one step.
>
Hi,
If your using MySQL (Other DBs may support this as well) you can insert
multiple rows like this.
INSERT INTO destination_table ( barcode2, wineID)
SELECT barcode2, wineID
FROM wine
WHERE barcode2 > 0;
(adjust to your spec)
Check out the manual page here (MySQL 5.1):
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/insert-select.html
You can jump to the manual for other versions from this page too.
Build up your SELECT statement first and then add the INSERT line when
you're happy its getting the right values. If you want to be really
careful, insert into a temporary table first.
Regards
Ian
--
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Paul M Foster wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:05:14PM +0000, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 15:06 -0800, Daevid Vincent wrote:
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-12846-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=310099&messageID=3099392&tag=content;leftCol
That guy's partial to JOE. Pffft. Real men use Vim. And Emacs is for
Martians with ten fingers on each hand.
I use mg on OpenBSD. Somewhat the same as Emacs. Just a simplified version of
it.
And yeah, for what it's worth, I've been running Linux since 1996.
And yeah, cats are smarter than dogs.
Flame on! ;-}
Paul
--
Jim Lucas
A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lots of confusion!
So I tried this,
$ for x in cat dog rabbit rat; do echo -n "$x "; if whatis $x >
/dev/null; then echo found; else echo not found; fi ; done;
cat found
dog not found
rabbit not found
rat not found
--
Shiplu Mokaddim
My talks, http://talk.cmyweb.net
Follow me, http://twitter.com/shiplu
SUST Programmers, http://groups.google.com/group/p2psust
Innovation distinguishes bet ... ... (ask Steve Jobs the rest)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 24/02/10 08:20, shiplu wrote:
Lots of confusion!
So I tried this,
$ for x in cat dog rabbit rat; do echo -n "$x "; if whatis $x>
/dev/null; then echo found; else echo not found; fi ; done;
cat found
dog not found
rabbit not found
rat not found
That's easy to fix:
sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/dog
sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rabbit
sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rat
Sorted...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:18 +0000, Pete Ford wrote:
> On 24/02/10 08:20, shiplu wrote:
> > Lots of confusion!
> >
> > So I tried this,
> >
> > $ for x in cat dog rabbit rat; do echo -n "$x "; if whatis $x>
> > /dev/null; then echo found; else echo not found; fi ; done;
> > cat found
> > dog not found
> > rabbit not found
> > rat not found
> >
> >
> >
>
> That's easy to fix:
>
> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/dog
> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rabbit
> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rat
>
> Sorted...
>
But now they're in /bin, surely at some point you'll want to execute
these poor pets? Haven't they been through enough already?!
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Ashley Sheridan
<a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:18 +0000, Pete Ford wrote:
>> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/dog
>> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rabbit
>> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rat
>>
>> Sorted...
>>
>
>
> But now they're in /bin, surely at some point you'll want to execute
> these poor pets? Haven't they been through enough already?!
>
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
If you have a cat, dog, rabbit and rat together in a bin, you probably
won't have to execute them. At least not all of them. :-P
Andrew
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:22 -0500, Andrew Ballard wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Ashley Sheridan
> <a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:18 +0000, Pete Ford wrote:
> >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/dog
> >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rabbit
> >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rat
> >>
> >> Sorted...
> >>
> >
> >
> > But now they're in /bin, surely at some point you'll want to execute
> > these poor pets? Haven't they been through enough already?!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ash
> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >
>
> If you have a cat, dog, rabbit and rat together in a bin, you probably
> won't have to execute them. At least not all of them. :-P
>
> Andrew
>
Reminds me of Eddie Izzards Noah's Ark sketch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFdmG-TRxzE
The bit I'm thinking of is about 6 minutes in ;)
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 14:24 +0000, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:22 -0500, Andrew Ballard wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Ashley Sheridan
> > <a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:18 +0000, Pete Ford wrote:
> > >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/dog
> > >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rabbit
> > >> sudo ln -s /bin/cat /bin/rat
> > >>
> > >> Sorted...
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > But now they're in /bin, surely at some point you'll want to execute
> > > these poor pets? Haven't they been through enough already?!
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ash
> > > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> > >
> >
> > If you have a cat, dog, rabbit and rat together in a bin, you probably
> > won't have to execute them. At least not all of them. :-P
> >
> > Andrew
> >
>
>
> Reminds me of Eddie Izzards Noah's Ark sketch:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFdmG-TRxzE
>
> The bit I'm thinking of is about 6 minutes in ;)
>
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
Actually, this clip is a bit better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrP8ey8VheU
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:44:17 +0800, Nathan Rixham wrote:
As PHP is loosely typed, the only real way around this is to specify a
return type in a PHPDoc block, then parse that using reflection to get
the @return parameter.
another option is to use something like haXe which is an ECMA style
typed language that compiles to multiple targets, one of which is PHP.
Thanks Nathan for your comment. But I think the PHPDoc stuff is only for
user defined functions, right? The Reflection::getDocComment() has no idea
about the built-in functions.
--
Dasn
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Op 2/24/10 1:16 AM, Ashley Sheridan schreef:
> On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 19:19 -0600, Kevin Kinsey wrote:
>
>> Ashley Sheridan wrote:
>>> is_quantum() is pretty useful as well, if you want to see if it's sort
>>> of there and not at the same time. Probably turns into a cat in a box at
>>> some point too, everything quantum has cats in...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ash
>>
>> So, should we add to the list:
>>
>> is_schrodingers_cat_alive()
>>
>> ??
>>
>> KDK
>>
>
>
> I think PHP would crash trying to return the boolean value from that
> one!
no. either it returns a random boolean, or the func signature is missing a
boolean $weOpenedTheBox parameter ... in which case it should be fully
deterministic. :)
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Op 2/22/10 10:49 PM, John Black schreef:
> On 02/22/2010 11:42 PM, Michael Shadle wrote:
>> The difference here is you can at least have some control over the data
>> and expect it in a certain fashion. Also the behavior of cookies vs. get
>> vs. post are different (cookies have length and expiration limits, get
>> has length limits, post has server confgured limits)
>
> The cookie and post/get part is all mixed up now :)
>
> I use $_COOKIE when I want cookie information but I know that the data
> is not to be trusted and is easily fabricated.
>
> When reading get or post I just use $_REQUEST nowadays because I don't
> have to care how the submitting form is written. This makes my form
> handling data more portable.
a. if your updating/inserting/storing data for the user you should require
POST in order to mitigate CSRF et al - not to mention using a nonce in your
forms.
b. when you use $_REQUEST like you do you assume it's either GET or POST data,
but
it might be COOKIE data ... which will overwrite what is sent via GET or POST
in the
$_REQUEST array .. which creates a potential for a denial-of-service attack on
the
users of a site:
imagine an 'id' parameter for displaying articles, then imagine a
user was tricked into loading a cookie onto his machine for your domain with the
name of 'id' and a value of 1 ... said user would only ever be able to see the
article referred to be id=1 if you wrote code that took the 'id' parameter from
the
$_REQUEST var.
... I advocate not trusting any data *and* being explicit about the input
vectors
on which any particular piece of data is accepted in a given context. (GET,
POST and COOKIE
are 3 different vectors)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 07:55 +0000, Jochem Maas wrote:
> Op 2/22/10 10:49 PM, John Black schreef:
> > On 02/22/2010 11:42 PM, Michael Shadle wrote:
> >> The difference here is you can at least have some control over the data
> >> and expect it in a certain fashion. Also the behavior of cookies vs. get
> >> vs. post are different (cookies have length and expiration limits, get
> >> has length limits, post has server confgured limits)
> >
> > The cookie and post/get part is all mixed up now :)
> >
> > I use $_COOKIE when I want cookie information but I know that the data
> > is not to be trusted and is easily fabricated.
> >
> > When reading get or post I just use $_REQUEST nowadays because I don't
> > have to care how the submitting form is written. This makes my form
> > handling data more portable.
>
> a. if your updating/inserting/storing data for the user you should require
> POST in order to mitigate CSRF et al - not to mention using a nonce in your
> forms.
>
> b. when you use $_REQUEST like you do you assume it's either GET or POST
> data, but
> it might be COOKIE data ... which will overwrite what is sent via GET or POST
> in the
> $_REQUEST array .. which creates a potential for a denial-of-service attack
> on the
> users of a site:
>
> imagine an 'id' parameter for displaying articles, then imagine a
> user was tricked into loading a cookie onto his machine for your domain with
> the
> name of 'id' and a value of 1 ... said user would only ever be able to see the
> article referred to be id=1 if you wrote code that took the 'id' parameter
> from the
> $_REQUEST var.
>
> ... I advocate not trusting any data *and* being explicit about the input
> vectors
> on which any particular piece of data is accepted in a given context. (GET,
> POST and COOKIE
> are 3 different vectors)
>
>
>
Which becomes a moot point if you use the request_order ini setting to
specify the ordering of the overriding of variables in $_REQUEST.
I do see what you're getting at, and yes there are concerns to be had
with one global array overriding another if you don't know to look out
for such a caveat. The thing is, there are many times where $_REQUEST is
just perfect. Imagine a stylesheet picker, that remembers the visitors
choice in a cookie. You can utilise $_REQUEST to handle the whole thing
very easily, and in a way that makes sense.
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
sry i gotta disagree.
a function that queries $_POST/$_GET first and then $_COOKIE seems
much wiser to me.
it consolidates all logic in the script, and making that logic obvious
by syntax, rather than relying on functionality being determined by
php.ini, which could well cause a new developer to lose heaps of time
if he/she has to work on it..
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Ashley Sheridan
<a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 07:55 +0000, Jochem Maas wrote:
>
>> Op 2/22/10 10:49 PM, John Black schreef:
>> > On 02/22/2010 11:42 PM, Michael Shadle wrote:
>> >> The difference here is you can at least have some control over the data
>> >> and expect it in a certain fashion. Also the behavior of cookies vs. get
>> >> vs. post are different (cookies have length and expiration limits, get
>> >> has length limits, post has server confgured limits)
>> >
>> > The cookie and post/get part is all mixed up now :)
>> >
>> > I use $_COOKIE when I want cookie information but I know that the data
>> > is not to be trusted and is easily fabricated.
>> >
>> > When reading get or post I just use $_REQUEST nowadays because I don't
>> > have to care how the submitting form is written. This makes my form
>> > handling data more portable.
>>
>> a. if your updating/inserting/storing data for the user you should require
>> POST in order to mitigate CSRF et al - not to mention using a nonce in your
>> forms.
>>
>> b. when you use $_REQUEST like you do you assume it's either GET or POST
>> data, but
>> it might be COOKIE data ... which will overwrite what is sent via GET or
>> POST in the
>> $_REQUEST array .. which creates a potential for a denial-of-service attack
>> on the
>> users of a site:
>>
>> imagine an 'id' parameter for displaying articles, then imagine a
>> user was tricked into loading a cookie onto his machine for your domain with
>> the
>> name of 'id' and a value of 1 ... said user would only ever be able to see
>> the
>> article referred to be id=1 if you wrote code that took the 'id' parameter
>> from the
>> $_REQUEST var.
>>
>> ... I advocate not trusting any data *and* being explicit about the input
>> vectors
>> on which any particular piece of data is accepted in a given context. (GET,
>> POST and COOKIE
>> are 3 different vectors)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Which becomes a moot point if you use the request_order ini setting to
> specify the ordering of the overriding of variables in $_REQUEST.
>
> I do see what you're getting at, and yes there are concerns to be had
> with one global array overriding another if you don't know to look out
> for such a caveat. The thing is, there are many times where $_REQUEST is
> just perfect. Imagine a stylesheet picker, that remembers the visitors
> choice in a cookie. You can utilise $_REQUEST to handle the whole thing
> very easily, and in a way that makes sense.
>
> Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 12:34 +0100, Rene Veerman wrote:
> sry i gotta disagree.
>
> a function that queries $_POST/$_GET first and then $_COOKIE seems
> much wiser to me.
> it consolidates all logic in the script, and making that logic obvious
> by syntax, rather than relying on functionality being determined by
> php.ini, which could well cause a new developer to lose heaps of time
> if he/she has to work on it..
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Ashley Sheridan
> <a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 07:55 +0000, Jochem Maas wrote:
> >
> >> Op 2/22/10 10:49 PM, John Black schreef:
> >> > On 02/22/2010 11:42 PM, Michael Shadle wrote:
> >> >> The difference here is you can at least have some control over the data
> >> >> and expect it in a certain fashion. Also the behavior of cookies vs. get
> >> >> vs. post are different (cookies have length and expiration limits, get
> >> >> has length limits, post has server confgured limits)
> >> >
> >> > The cookie and post/get part is all mixed up now :)
> >> >
> >> > I use $_COOKIE when I want cookie information but I know that the data
> >> > is not to be trusted and is easily fabricated.
> >> >
> >> > When reading get or post I just use $_REQUEST nowadays because I don't
> >> > have to care how the submitting form is written. This makes my form
> >> > handling data more portable.
> >>
> >> a. if your updating/inserting/storing data for the user you should require
> >> POST in order to mitigate CSRF et al - not to mention using a nonce in
> >> your forms.
> >>
> >> b. when you use $_REQUEST like you do you assume it's either GET or POST
> >> data, but
> >> it might be COOKIE data ... which will overwrite what is sent via GET or
> >> POST in the
> >> $_REQUEST array .. which creates a potential for a denial-of-service
> >> attack on the
> >> users of a site:
> >>
> >> imagine an 'id' parameter for displaying articles, then imagine a
> >> user was tricked into loading a cookie onto his machine for your domain
> >> with the
> >> name of 'id' and a value of 1 ... said user would only ever be able to see
> >> the
> >> article referred to be id=1 if you wrote code that took the 'id' parameter
> >> from the
> >> $_REQUEST var.
> >>
> >> ... I advocate not trusting any data *and* being explicit about the input
> >> vectors
> >> on which any particular piece of data is accepted in a given context.
> >> (GET, POST and COOKIE
> >> are 3 different vectors)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Which becomes a moot point if you use the request_order ini setting to
> > specify the ordering of the overriding of variables in $_REQUEST.
> >
> > I do see what you're getting at, and yes there are concerns to be had
> > with one global array overriding another if you don't know to look out
> > for such a caveat. The thing is, there are many times where $_REQUEST is
> > just perfect. Imagine a stylesheet picker, that remembers the visitors
> > choice in a cookie. You can utilise $_REQUEST to handle the whole thing
> > very easily, and in a way that makes sense.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ash
> > http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
>
I don't think ini settings should be disregarded so easily though. There
are plenty of other ini settings that affect global variables, and can
all cause issues that can confuse the unwary developer!
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi folks
I'm hacking on a SOAP2 solution towards Magento and have retrieved the
catalog in an array, but i'm having trouble accessing the values of the
array cause there's an object in it. This is a var_dump of $my_array:
array(14) {
[0]=>
object(stdClass)#2 (2) {
["set_id"]=>
int(44)
["name"]=>
string(7) "Cameras"
}
[1]=>
object(stdClass)#3 (2) {
["set_id"]=>
int(38)
["name"]=>
string(11) "Cell Phones"
}
how do I access for instance set_id in $my_array[0]? I tried declaring
an instance of $my_array[0] but that fails too: "Fatal error: Cannot use
object of type stdClass as array "
--
Kind regards
Kim Emax - masterminds.dk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Kim Madsen wrote on 24/02/2010 14:02:
how do I access for instance set_id in $my_array[0]? I tried declaring
an instance of $my_array[0] but that fails too: "Fatal error: Cannot use
object of type stdClass as array "
$my_array[0]->set_id; did the trick
--
Kind regards
Kim Emax - masterminds.dk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Basically... I built the stream encapsulation to do two things for me:
1. Keep track of the row I was on.
2. Keep track of the columns by name. So if I wrote columns Foo, Bar,
Baz one time and Foo, Baz the next it would automatically keep the Baz
in column three the second time.
In other words, it makes it simple to just dump row after row of data
into it for exports and simple reports.
Matt
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Rene Veerman <rene7...@gmail.com> wrote:
> just curious, why did you choose to use it from behind a stream wrapper?
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Matt Neimeyer <m...@neimeyer.org> wrote:
>> I created a stream wrapper around the php_writeexcel library found at
>> http://www.bettina-attack.de/jonny/view.php/projects/php_writeexcel/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
FYI
http://digg.com/programming/PHP_compiler_performance
--
Regards,
Manuel Lemos
Find and post PHP jobs
http://www.phpclasses.org/jobs/
PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP
http://www.phpclasses.org/
--- End Message ---
