I take that back. I do think that || is the correct behaviour. If
$_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] is not set, then short-circuit and perform
the TRUE portion of the if clause. If it is set, then check if
$connection_details[$_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT']] is set.
I suppose that we could use DeMorgan's law to negate the negations,
but then the code is less readable and clear.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Dotan Cohen <dotancohen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> You nearly had it, it should be something like:
>>
>> if ( !isset($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT']) &&
>> !isset($connection_details[$_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT']]) ) {
>>
>> The reason for && and not || is that an kr can still fail on $_SERVER'[DOCUMENT_ROOT'] being set and still try to use it in the second part of the if(). The and will only return true if both are set.
>>
>> have you tested with warnings turned on (as they should be on every development environment) and tested with a non-existent $_SERVER array element?
>>
>
> Thank you. At the point as which I asked the development code is not
> yet written. On other projects I have done the initial (possibly
> redundant) isset() check properly using &&, but for this mailing list
> question I accidentally used ||. I agree, proper unit testing
> discipline would have caught that!
>
> That you for letting me know that the check is not redundant. I do
> prefer to have warnings turned on but not displayed to users on
> production systems, of course!
>
> --
> Dotan Cohen
>
> http://gibberish.co.il
> http://what-is-what.com
--
Dotan Cohen
http://gibberish.co.il
http://what-is-what.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
