Is there a general heuristics for PHP coding?

[Lord_Yggdrasill]

Just wondering... I thought there should be a well-accepted standards for PHP coding, such as ternary operators are usually better to use than If and switch statements(except when it comes to certain situations that ternary operators cannot be used).

[dalecosp]

Hmm. I'd think this would be on a shop-by-shop, or project-by-project basis. For example, while ternary operators make for nice one-liner material, they can be confusing in some situations (example code, code that's already confusing) and to some people (everyone was a "noob" at one time, right?)

And are we talking about style, also? Just dealt with that in a post ... have we ever had an epic style argument thread here? Elder Days, maybe? Or since I kinda quit paying attention?

Brad? :p

[dalecosp]

Incidentally, how would you use a ternary operator to replace a [man]switch/man? Switches are generally more than two options, aren't they?

Mine are 😉

[bradgrafelman]

You label something as an "epic .. argument" and you instantly blame me?

There might've been a thread dedicated to it at some point, but I don't think I've ever participated in it. Mostly because it would become a thread of thousands of posts (all probably shortened to fit inside the post limit).

However, there's probably a lot of "style arguments" creeping into a good majority of threads here. And that's probably the easiest way to do it, since there are lots of idiosyncrasies throughout the PHP community, with the possibility for each to have several variations and advocates behind them.

Plus, even if there was such a thread, who is to say that it's still relevant today? PHP has grown and changed a lot - as a language, as a programming community, just a lot - and it's quite possible that some (or even most) of those changes along the way have changed what the majority accept as "general practices" or whatever you want to call them.

I think your answer above, dalecosp, pretty much sums it up for me:

dalecosp wrote:

I'd think this would be on a shop-by-shop, or project-by-project basis.

If you take your programming into the corporate world, there will be internal resources to answer (and/or override your own answers) the types of questions I think the OP is after.

(And let me tell you, it's a very disappointing first day when instead of doing some programming like you thought you'd be doing, you're instead staring at the 50-something page "Coding Style and Guidelines" handbook that reads as dryly as a college textbook.)

[bradgrafelman]

dalecosp;10988283 wrote:

Incidentally, how would you use a ternary operator to replace a [man]switch/man?

Quite easily... this:

switch($var1) {
	case 'foo':
		echo "it is foo.";
		break;

case 'bar':
	echo "it is bar.";
	break;

default:
	echo "what in the hell did you give me?!";
}

becomes:

$var1 == 'foo' ? print("it is foo.") : ($var1 == 'bar' ? print("it is bar.") : print("what in the hell did you give me?!"));

EDIT: Note, of course, that I'm exploiting the fact that there is no switch() statement that you can't just convert into an if/else nested structure instead. Example for above switch():

if($var1 == 'foo') {
	echo "it is foo.";
} else {
	if($var2 == 'bar') {
		echo "it is bar.";
	} else {
		echo "what in the hell did you give me?!";
	}
}

which is dangerously close to looking like a nested ternary operator already.

[dalecosp]

Ok, ok, but I never use switch when "if elseif else" will do. Gotta have at least four possibilities for a switch. I'm sure it's in the 50-page manual someplace :p

For the record, I wasn't saying you were responsible for an epic flaming thread of doom about anything. I just figured if there'd been one in the last few years you'd know about it. 😃

[bradgrafelman]

dalecosp;10988289 wrote:

Ok, ok, but I never use switch when "if elseif else" will do. Gotta have at least four possibilities for a switch. I'm sure it's in the 50-page manual someplace :p

Actually, mine said "You will not use switch/case statements. Ever." or something like it. It was right next to a sentence that said the same thing about the ternary operator as well. :p

[cretaceous]

I know I've stood up for the usefulness and clarity of the switch statement before..
but I guess a style guide might discourage it because an omitted "break;" can be silently disastrous

there's a thread somewhere here on preferred indent practice.. and placement of curly braces (e.g on line with opening statement or on their own line.. )
exciting stuff isn't it

[traq]

I just try to keep stuff readable without spreading it out over too many lines unnecessarily.

For example, I've seen it done, but I will never do this

if(
TRUE
)
{
  // some code
}

furthermore,

if(TRUE){
  reallyShortCodeBlock();
}
// will always be condensed to
if(TRUE){ reallyShortCodeBlock(); }
// even though it technically doesn't follow my preferred indenting style

[laserlight]

bradgrafelman wrote:

PHP has grown and changed a lot - as a language, as a programming community, just a lot - and it's quite possible that some (or even most) of those changes along the way have changed what the majority accept as "general practices" or whatever you want to call them.

One thing that comes to mind is the use of name prefixes. It was good practice to prefix class and non-member function names with some library prefix so as to avoid name collisions. With the introduction of namespaces, I would now consider that to be an outdated practice that is not good.

Lord Yggdrasill wrote:

I thought there should be a well-accepted standards for PHP coding

I think that there are indeed generally accepted sets of good practices for writing PHP code. I have a set stored mentally that I use to evaluate the code I read, and I presume the same applies for other experienced programmers. Trying to codify this can be difficult, though coding standards attempt to do so. However, because of a desire for consistency with the project/company, a coding standard may go further into the specifics, perhaps even mandating arbitrary style, in which case it would not be representative of what is universally practiced.

Lord Yggdrasill wrote:

ternary operators are usually better to use than If and switch statements(except when it comes to certain situations that ternary operators cannot be used).

This is an example of why codifying good practice can be difficult. Stated as-is, your assertion is utter rubbish. What you probably had in mind were specific cases such as those where a variable would be conditionally assigned a value (or the value would be returned), and one could reach for an if statement:

if ($condition) {
    $x = $y;
} else {
    $x = $z;
}

or use the ternary operator:

$x = $condition ? $y : $z;

and it is clear that the use of the ternary operator is superior. Yet, if $condition, $y and/or $z were to be complex expressions instead, it may be less certain that the use of the ternary operator would improve readability. So, I can understand if a coding standard simply banned the use of the ternary operator to be consistent and avoid stylistic judgment calls.

[NogDog]

At my current job, the only acceptable use of the ternary operator is for "simple" situations -- those that do not involve lots of additional logic and definitely not nesting. I.e., anything at all complex should be handled in other ways.

OK:

$var = (isset($_POST['var'])) ? $_POST['var'] : 0;

Not OK:

$var = (isset($_POST['var'])) ? (($someObj->validate($_POST['var'])) ? mysql_real_escape_string($_POST['var']) : $someObj->getDefault()) : null;

Always give preference to readability over perceived elegance of terseness or imagined savings of microseconds. It's much easier and more cost effective to throw more hardware and/or code pre-compilers/caches at your project than to spend countless man/hours later when trying to maintain difficult to read code.

While I by no means embrace all of their rules (e.g. I prefer to indent with tabs instead of spaces now), you can look at the PEAR standards as a decent starting point, if for no other reason than to identify the various choices you need to make to develop your own consistent standards.

[Weedpacket]

dalecosp wrote:

And are we talking about style, also? Just dealt with that in a post ... have we ever had an epic style argument thread here? Elder Days, maybe? Or since I kinda quit paying attention?

:eek:
It was THAT long ago?!

[dalecosp]

Yea, indeed! Nice find, o ye of the far-seeing eye. 😃

I guess I'd forgotten, in particular, of kriek's excellent exposition there.

1TBS forever 😉 (with traq's mods, of course :p)