Work with my $_GET array or fill it into variables and then work with those?

[mikeycorn]

Which is considered better practice? To use my $_GET array and work with it like below:

if (strlen($_GET['name']) > 0) {

  $_GET['name'] = stripslashes($_GET['name']);

} else {

// If no name was entered...

  $_GET['name'] = NULL;
  echo "<p><b>You forgot to enter your name!</b></p>";

}

or to fill separate variables and then work from those.

[robert_w_ark]

use isset()

for example..

if(!isset($_GET['name']))
  echo "Name is not set.";
else
  echo "Name is: ".$_GET['name'];

[mikeycorn]

From what my book says,

"One problem with the isset() function is that an empty string tests as TRUE, so to check for these, you can use the strlen() function which counts the number of characters."

What I'm curious about though is whether it's good form to, for instance . . .

$_GET['zip'] = stripslashes($_GET['zip']);

or if I should

$zip = $_GET['zip']
$zip = stripslashes($zip);

and leave and $_GET['zip'] alone.

[leatherback]

Since I do a lot of error-trapping with the incomming vars, I always -no exceptions- use new variables in the code.

[mikeycorn]

Thanks for the reply.

From what I understand, with register_globals turned on, a variable called $name is automatically created to hold $_GET['name'] . . .

Would you use some convention other than $name to hold $_GET['name'] then?

[leatherback]

I would switch register_globals off, since it causes a potential security risk.

J.

[mikeycorn]

Very helpful, thanks. 🆒

[Drakla]

isset returning true for an empty string is a good thing, not a problem. You can use [man]empty[/man] instead the will return true if a variable isn't set or empty/null/false.