Bear with me, I'm learning.
I often see snippets like the one below:
<?p
$imageArray = get_field('image_field');
$imageAlt = $imageArray['alt'];
$imageURL = $imageArray['url'];
?>
It is pedagogical and clear and organized. But is it necessary to get the entire array before querying the array for values? Can I not define the variable in just a single line? Something like the below (which doesn't work, neither the other variants I have tried):
$imageAlt = get_field('image_field', ['alt']);
$imageURL = get_field('image_field', ['url']);
Yes, you can.
As of PHP 5.4 it is possible to array dereference the result of a function or method call directly. Before it was only possible using a temporary variable. - Source
$imageAlt = get_field('image_field')['alt'];
https://eval.in/548036
The question you are asking can be answered by asking 2 questions:
Is it doable ?
Is it a good idea to do it that way ?
Is it doable ?
Yes! You do not have to store the array in a variable and re-use it later.
For instance, you could do:
$imageAlt = get_field('image_field')['alt'];
Note: This will work in PHP 5.4+ and is called: Array dereferencing.
But that is not the only consideration...
Is it a good idea to do it that way ?
No. It's not a good idea in many cases. The get_field() function, depending on your context, is probably doing a lot of work and, each time you call it, the same work is don multiple times.
Let's say you use the count() function. It will count the number of items in an array. To do that, it must iterate through all items to get the value.
If you use the count() function each time you need to validate number of items in an array, you are doing the task of counting each and every time. If you have 10 items in your array, you probably won't notice. But if you have thousands of items in your array, this may cause a delay problem to compute your code (a.k.a. it will be slow).
That is why you would want to do something like: $count = count($myArray); and use a variable instead of calling the function.
The same applies to your question.
While PHP 5.4+ allows you to directly dereference a function return value like this:
get_field('image_field')['alt']
...in this particular case I would not suggest you do so, since you're using two values from the resulting array. A function call has a certain overhead just in itself, and additionally you don't know what the function does behind the scenes before it returns a result. If you call the function twice, you may incur a ton of unnecessary work, where a single function call would have done just as well.
This is not to mention keeping your code DRY; if you need to change the particulars of the function call, you now need to change it twice...
PHP allows you to play around quite a bit:
function foo(){
return array('foo' => 1, 'bar' => 2);
}
Option 1
echo foo()['foo']; // 1
# Better do this if you plan to reuse the array value.
echo ($tmp = foo())['foo']; // 1
echo $tmp['bar']; // 2
It is not recommended to call a function that returns an array, to specifically fetch 1 key and on the next line doing the same thing.
So it is better to store the result of the function in a variable so you can use it afterwards.
Option 2
list($foo, $bar) = array_values(foo());
#foo is the first element of the array, and sets in $foo.
#bar is the second element, and will be set in $bar.
#This behavior is in PHP 7, previously it was ordered from right to left.
echo $foo, $bar; // 12
Option 3
extract(foo()); // Creates variable from the array keys.
echo $foo, $bar;
extract(get_field('image_field'));
echo $alt, $url;
Find more information on the list constructor and extract function.
Related
If you are a PHP developer you most probably have seen the following notice:
Notice: Only variables should be passed by reference in /somefile.php
on line xxx
(Problem extensivley treated in Only variables should be passed by reference)
Example throwing notice:
$string = "hi-dude";
echo end(explode('-', $string));
Working example:
$string = "hi-dude";
$strings = explode('-', $string);
echo end($strings);
Explanation:
Only real variables may be passed by reference, not functions which are returning the correct variable.
However I can not think of a good reason why this notice is happening. It feels unecessary and requires me to write a lot of extra lines of code sometimes. What is the reason for PHP having this strange restriction? Why does this problem even exist?
end() or array_pop() will return the E_NOTICE with message
Only variables should be passed by reference
The reason is that end() requires a reference, because it makes the current element pointer point to the last element.
You can do it with one line,
$string = "this-is-a-sample-text";
echo substr(strrchr($string, '-'), 1);
DEMO: https://3v4l.org/jO29n
Finally I found a great explanation which helped me to understand this: What's the difference between passing by reference vs. passing by value?
As Daniel Pryden states:
In simplest terms:
call by value means that you pass values as function arguments
call by reference means that you pass variables as function arguments
In metaphoric terms:
Call by value is where I write down something on a piece of paper and hand it to you. Maybe it's a URL, maybe it's a complete copy of
War and Peace. No matter what it is, it's on a piece of paper which
I've given to you, and so now it is effectively your piece of paper.
You are now free to scribble on that piece of paper, or use that piece
of paper to find something somewhere else and fiddle with it,
whatever.
Call by reference is when I give you my notebook which has something written down in it. You may scribble in my notebook (maybe I
want you to, maybe I don't), and afterwards I keep my notebook, with
whatever scribbles you've put there. Also, if what either you or I
wrote there is information about how to find something somewhere else,
either you or I can go there and fiddle with that information.
In this case the notice "Only variables should be passed by reference" is still unjustified as we are only interested in retrieving the last value of the array. However the function end() is defined like
mixed end ( array &$array )
The & sign which states passing by reference is there for a certain reason: end() is not just returning the last element of an array, it also changes its internal pointer to the end. Therefore the array is modified.
If we only would return the last element of an array without touching the array there would be no need to pass the array by reference and we would not get this notice. But end() is somehow the wrong function for that.
What if there is no justification for me getting this notice?
Note that also the function to be called might be defined wrong. In my case I hade a function defined like this:
/**
* Flatten an array by one level if only needing a certain key value from a sub array.
*
* Example: [["foo"=>"bar","foo"=>"cheese"]]
* Result: ["bar","cheese"]
*
* #param $array: The input array.
* #param $key: The key to flatupshift. Default is 0.
* #return $array: The result
*/
private function array_flatupshift(&$array, $key = 0) {
$a = [];
foreach ($array as $item) {
if (is_object($item)) {
array_push($a, $item->$key);
} else if (is_array($item)) {
array_push($a, $item[$key]);
}
}
return $a;
}
This is simply a wrong function definition. So if you also get notices like this: Check if the function you call is defined correctly. Passing by reference does not make sense here as the array being passed is not touched in any way. Therefore the function definition should be without the "reference &/":
private function array_flatupshift($array, $key = 0) {
There are some cases where you MIGHT use the error control operator if you know what you are doing. Therefore:
$string = "hi-dude";
echo #end(explode('-', $string));
... would be o.k. I guess is the result of explode is not needed anymore. However notice the drawbacks of suppressing all possible errors. Please correct me if I go wrong here.
I found following solution here on StackOverflow to get an array of a specific object property from array of objects: PHP - Extracting a property from an array of objects
The proposed solution is to use array_map and within create a function with create_function as following:
$catIds = array_map(create_function('$o', 'return $o->id;'), $objects);
What happens?: array_map runs through each array element in this case a stdClass object. First it creates a function like this:
function($o) {
return $o->id;
}
Second it calls this function for the object in the current iteration. It works, it works nearly same like this similar solution:
$catIds = array_map(function($o) { return $o->id; }, $objects);
But this solution is only running in PHP version >= 5.3 because it uses the Closure concept => http://php.net/manual/de/class.closure.php
Now the real problem:
The first solution with create_function increases the memory, because the created function will be written to the memory and not be reused or destroyed. In the second solution with Closure it will.
So the solutions gives the same results but have different behaviors with respect to the memory.
Following example:
// following array is given
$objects = array (
[0] => stdClass (
[id] => 1
),
[1] => stdClass (
[id] => 2
),
[2] => stdClass (
[id] => 3
)
)
BAD
while (true)
{
$objects = array_map(create_function('$o', 'return $o->id;'), $objects);
// result: array(1, 2, 3);
echo memory_get_usage() ."\n";
sleep(1);
}
4235616
4236600
4237560
4238520
...
GOOD
while (true)
{
$objects = array_map(function($o) { return $o->id; }, $objects);
// result: array(1, 2, 3);
echo memory_get_usage() ."\n";
sleep(1);
}
4235136
4235168
4235168
4235168
...
I spend so many time to find this out and now I want to know, if it's a bug with the garbage collector or do I made a mistake?
And why it make sense to leave the already created and called function in memory, when it'll never be reuse?
Here is a running example: http://ideone.com/9a1D5g
Updated: When I recursively search my code and it's dependencies e.g. PEAR and Zend then I found this BAD way too often.
Updated: When two functions are nested, we proceed from the inside out in order to evaluate this expression. In other words, it is first starting create_function (once) and that returning function name is the argument for the single call of array_map. But because GC forget to remove it from memory (no pointer left to the function in memory) and PHP not be able to reuse the function already located in memory let me think that there is an error and not only a thing with "bad performance". This specific line of code is an example in PHPDoc and reused in so many big frameworks e.g. Zend and PEAR and more. With one line more you can work around this "bug", check. But I'm not searching for a solution: I'm searching for the truth. Is it a bug or is it just my approach. And latter I could not decide yet.
In the case of create_function() a lambda-style function is created using eval(), and a string containing its name is returned. That name is then passed as argument to the array_map() function.
This differs from the closure-style anonymous function where no string containing a name is used at all. function($o) { return $o->id; } IS the function, or rather an instance of the Closure class.
The eval() function, inside create_function(), executes a piece of PHP code which creates the wanted function. Somewhat like this:
function create_function($arguments,$code)
{
$name = <_lambda_>; // just a unique string
eval('function '.$name.'($arguments){$code}');
return $name;
}
Note that this is a simplification.
So, once the function is created it will persist until the end of the script, just like normal functions in a script. In the above BAD example, a new function is created like this on every iteration of the loop, taking up more and more memory.
You can, however, intentionally destroy the lambda-style function. This is quite easy, just change the loop to:
while (true)
{
$func = create_function('$o', 'return $o->id;');
$objects = array_map($func, $objects);
echo memory_get_usage() ."\n";
sleep(1);
}
The string containting the reference (= name) to the function was made expliciet and accessible here. Now, every time create_function() is called, the old function is overwritten by a new one.
So, no, there's no 'Memory leak', it is meant to work this way.
Of course the code below is more efficient:
$func = create_function('$o', 'return $o->id;');
while (true)
{
$objects = array_map($func, $objects);
echo memory_get_usage() ."\n";
sleep(1);
}
And should only be used when closure-style anonymous function are not supported by your PHP version.
Don't use create_function() if you can avoid it. Particularly not repeatedly. Per the big yellow Caution box in the PHP manual:
...it has bad performance and memory usage characteristics.
OK, I think the problem is, that first solution with create_function is running on older versions of PHP and the second solution doesn't increase the memory unnecessary. But let's have a look at first solution. The create_function method is called inside the array_map, namely for each while iteration. If we want a solution to work with older PHP versions and without increasing memory we have to do following to the older function instance on each while iteration:
$func = create_function('$o', 'return $o->id;');
$catIds = array_map($func, $objects);
That's all. So simple.
But it also isn't answering the question at all. What remains is the question if it is a bug with PHP or a feature. For my understanding that way to write the result of create_function in a variable SHOULD be the same as put it directly as parameter in array_map, isn't it?
i know this
$var1 = "10";
$var2 = "var1";
then
echo $$var2 gives us 10
i want to this with array
i have array
$intake_arr = array(5=>10,7=>20,8=>30,9=>40,10=>50,11=>60,12=>70);
i have some logic that will pick one array from set of array , all array will look like $intake_arr
if i do this $target_arr = "intake_arr";
then can $$target_arr[5] will yield 10? i tried but i didnt that 10 value, how can i achieve this with array
Your statement ($$target_arr[5]) is ambiguous. PHP doesn't know what you actually want to say: Do you mean: use $target_arr[5]'s value and prepend the $, to use that as a variable, or do you want to use the value of $target_arr, and get the fifth element of that array?
Obviously it's the latter, but PHP doesn't know that. In order to disambiguate your statement, you have to use curly braces:
${$target_arr}[5];
That'll yield 10. See the manual on variable variables for details
Note:
As people said in comments, and deleted answers: variable variables, like the one you're using is risky business. 9/10 it can, and indeed should be avoided. It makes your code harder to read, more error prone and, in combination with the those two major disadvantages, this is the killer: it makes your code incredibly hard to debug.
If this is just a technical exercise, consider this note a piece of friendly advice. If you've gotten this from some sort of tutorial/blog or other type of online resource: never visit that site again.
If you're actually working on a piece of code, and you've decided to tackle a specific problem using variable vars, then perhaps post your code on code-review, and let me know, I'll have a look and try to offer some constructive criticism to help you on your way, towards a better solution.
Since what you're actually trying to do is copying an array into another variable, then that's quite easy. PHP offers a variety of ways to do that:
Copy by assignment:
PHP copies arrays on assignment, by default, so that means that:
$someArray = range(1,10);//[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
$foo = $someArray;
Assigns a copy of $someArray to the variable $foo:
echo $foo[0], ' === ', $someArray[0];//echoes 1 === 1
$foo[0] += 123;
echo $foo[0], ' != ', $someArray[0];//echoes 123 != 1
I can change the value of one of the array's elements without that affecting the original array, because it was copied.
There is a risk to this, as you start working with JSON encoded data, chances are that you'll end up with something like:
$obj = json_decode($string);
echo get_class($obj));//echoes stdClass, you have an object
Objects are, by default, passed and assigned by reference, which means that:
$obj = new stdClass;
$obj->some_property = 'foobar';
$foo = $obj;
$foo->some_property .= '2';
echo $obj->some_property;//echoes foobar2!
Change a property through $foo, and the $obj object will change, too. Simply because they both reference exactly the same object.
Slice the array:
A more common way for front-end developers (mainly, I think, stemming from a JS habbit) is to use array_slice, which guarantees to return a copy of the array. with the added perk that you can specify how many of the elements you'll be needing in your copy:
$someArray = range(1,100);//"large" array
$foo = array_slice($someArray, 0);//copy from index 0 to the end
$bar = array_slice($someArray, -10);//copy last 10 elements
$chunk = array_slice($someArray, 20, 4);//start at index 20, copy 4 elements
If you don't want to copy the array, but rather extract a section out of the original you can splice the array (as in split + slice):
$extract = array_splice($someArray, 0, 10);
echo count($someArray);//echoes 90
This removes the first 10 elements from the original array, and assigns them to $extract
Spend some time browsing the countless (well, about a hundred) array functions PHP offers.
${$target_arr}[5]
PHP: Variable variables
Try this one:
$intake_arr = array(5=>10,7=>20,8=>30,9=>40,10=>50,11=>60,12=>70);
$target_arr = 'intake_arr';
print ${$target_arr}[5]; //it gives 10
For a simple variable, braces are optional.But when you will use a array element, you must use braces; e.g.: ${$target_arr}[5];.As a standard, braces are used if variable interpolation is used, instead of concatenation.Generally variable interpolation is slow, but concatenation may also be slower if you have too many variables to concatenate.Take a look here for php variable variables http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.variable.php
One thing that's always bugged me (and everyone else, ever) about PHP is its inconsistency in function naming and parameters. Another more recent annoyance is its tendency to ask for function parameters by reference rather than by value.
I did a quick browse through the PHP manual, and found the function sort() as an example. If I was implementing that function I'd take an array by value, sort it into a new array, and return the new value. In PHP, sort() returns a boolean, and modifies the existing array.
How I'd like to call sort():
$array = array('c','a','b');
$sorted_array = sort($array);
How PHP wants me to call sort():
$array = array('c','a','b');
sort($array);
$sorted_array = $array;
And additionally, the following throws a fatal error: Fatal error: Only variables can be passed by reference
sort(array('c','a','b');
I'd imagine that part of this could be a legacy of PHP's old days, but there must have been a reason things were done this way. I can see the value in passing an object by reference ID like PHP 5+ does (which I guess is sort of in between pass by reference and pass by value), but not in the case of strings, arrays, integers and such.
I'm not an expert in the field of Computer Science, so as you can probably gather I'm trying to grasp some of these concepts still, and I'm curious as to whether there's a reason things are set up this way, or whether it's just a leftover.
The main reason is that PHP was developed by C programmers, and this is very much a C-programming paradigm. In C, it makes sense to pass a pointer to a data structure you want changed. In PHP, not so much (Among other things, because references are not the same as a pointer).
I believe this is done for speed-reason.
Most of the time you need the array you are working on to be sorted, not a copy.
If sort should have returned a new copy of the array then for each time you call sort(); the PHP engine should have copied the array into new one (lowering speed and increasing space cost) and you would have no way to control this behaviour.
If you need the original array to be not sorted (and this doesn't happen so often) then just do:
$copy = $yourArray;
sort($yourArray);
I know that prepending a '&' to your PHP variable sets up a reference to the original variable instead of copying its value like so:
$original = 'apples';
$secondary = &$original;
$original = 'oranges';
echo $secondary; // 'oranges'
If it works this way, why not just use the original variable then?
Passing by reference is useful and necessary when passing a variable as a parameter to a function, expecting that variable to be modified without a copy being created in memory. Many of PHP's native array_*() functions operate on array references, for example.
This function, for example, receives an array reference and appends an element onto the original array. If this was done without the & reference, a new array copy would be created in scope of the function. It would then have to be returned and reassigned to be used.
function add_to_an_array(&$array)
{
// Append a value to the array
$array[] = 'another value';
}
$array = array('one', 'two', 'three');
add_to_an_array($array);
print_r($array);
Array
(
[0] => one
[1] => two
[2] => three
[3] => another value
)
$original = 'apples';
function foo($word) {
$word = 'oranges';
}
foo($original);
echo $original; // apples, because only local $word was changed, not $original.
foo(&$original);
echo $original; // oranges, because $original and $word are the same
Pass by reference is really a cop out and goes against good encapsulation. If you need to manipulate a variable in that way, it probably should belong to a class as a member variable and then does not need to be passed to the function. Good OO design would usually make member variables immutable with a "final" keyword, but PHP doesn't have this. It's not intuitive that passing a variable to a function might change it's value which is why it should be avoided in most cases.
Also going to a more full OO design prevents you have having method signatures that are long and complex with many optional parameters that are difficult to re-factor.
A more interesting use of the is when it's used in the formal argument to a function
foo($a);
...
function foo (&$a) {
....
}
this allows you to modify a in the function.
There are many uses for references.
You can pass a reference to a variable to a function so you can change the value inside the function
You can use references to create linked lists
etc...
Just keep in mind that they're there, and you'll surely find an application for them when the time comes and you face a problem that can be solved with references.
Check out the following article for other ideas and uses of references:
http://www.elated.com/articles/php-references/