Hello,
I have a function, e.g.
function foo() {
include("bar.php");
}
and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
$global_v1 = "abc";
$global_v2 = "def";
I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
Thanks.
howa wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a function, e.g.
>
> function foo() {
> include("bar.php");
> }
>
> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>
> $global_v1 = "abc";
> $global_v2 = "def";
>
> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>
> Thanks.
>
You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
this can be solved by using include_once.
the reason of using function call to include is we want to selectively
include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
method?)
On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
> howa wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> > I have a function, e.g.
>
> > function foo() {
> > include("bar.php");
> > }
>
> > and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>
> > $global_v1 = "abc";
> > $global_v2 = "def";
>
> > I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
> > variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>
> > Thanks.
>
> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>
> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstuck...@attglobal.net
> ==================
"Bruno Barros"
news:1191073761.283822.306170@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.. .
> On 29 Sep, 13:23, howa
> include "bar.php";
>
> Good enough?
Better to use "requires_once()" or "include_once()".
howa wrote:
>>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
> On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
>> howa wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I have a function, e.g.
>>> function foo() {
>>> include("bar.php");
>>> }
>>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>>> $global_v1 = "abc";
>>> $global_v2 = "def";
>>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
>>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>>> Thanks.
>> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
>> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>
>> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>>
>> --
>> ==================
>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>> Jerry Stuckle
>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>> ==================
>
>
>
> this can be solved by using include_once.
>
> the reason of using function call to include is we want to selectively
> include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
> method?)
>
>
(Top posting fixed)
It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
And please don't top post. Thanks.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
On 29 Sep, 19:26, "Sanders Kaufman"
> "Bruno Barros"
>
> news:1191073761.283822.306170@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.. .
>
> > On 29 Sep, 13:23, howa
> > include "bar.php";
>
> > Good enough?
>
> Better to use "requires_once()" or "include_once()".
Yes I know that.
>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
I am posting via Google Group, I am no control.
On 9 30 , 2 42 , Jerry Stuckle
> howa wrote:
> >>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
> > On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
> >> howa wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>> I have a function, e.g.
> >>> function foo() {
> >>> include("bar.php");
> >>> }
> >>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
> >>> $global_v1 = "abc";
> >>> $global_v2 = "def";
> >>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
> >>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
> >>> Thanks.
> >> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
> >> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>
> >> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>
> >> --
> >> ==================
> >> Remove the "x" from my email address
> >> Jerry Stuckle
> >> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> >> jstuck...@attglobal.net
> >> ==================
>
> >
> > this can be solved by using include_once.
> >
> > the reason of using function call to include is we want to selectively
> > include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
> > method?)
> >
> >
>
> (Top posting fixed)
>
> It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
> do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
>
> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstuck...@attglobal.net
> ==================
On 30 Sep, 08:30, howa
> >> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>
> I am posting via Google Group, I am no control.
>
> On 9 30 , 2 42 , Jerry Stuckle
>
> > howa wrote:
> > >>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
> > > On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
> > >> howa wrote:
> > >>> Hello,
> > >>> I have a function, e.g.
> > >>> function foo() {
> > >>> include("bar.php");
> > >>> }
> > >>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
> > >>> $global_v1 = "abc";
> > >>> $global_v2 = "def";
> > >>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
> > >>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
> > >>> Thanks.
> > >> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
> > >> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>
> > >> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>
> > >> --
> > >> ==================
> > >> Remove the "x" from my email address
> > >> Jerry Stuckle
> > >> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> > >> jstuck...@attglobal.net
> > >> ==================
>
> > > this can be solved by using include_once.
>
> > > the reason of using function call to include is we want to selectively
> > > include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
> > > method?)
>
> > (Top posting fixed)
>
> > It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
> > do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
>
> > And please don't top post. Thanks.
>
> > --
> > ==================
> > Remove the "x" from my email address
> > Jerry Stuckle
> > JDS Computer Training Corp.
> > jstuck...@attglobal.net
> > ==================
>
>
I post via Google Groups and never top-posted ;).
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:27:28 +0200, howa
> On 9 29 , 9 49 , Bruno Barros
>> On 29 Sep, 13:23, howa
>> > I have a function, e.g.
>>
>> > function foo() {
>> > include("bar.php");
>>
>> > }
>>
>> > and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>>
>> > $global_v1 =3D "abc";
>> > $global_v2 =3D "def";
>>
>> > I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
>> > variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?=
>> function foo() {
>> global $global_v1;
>> global $global_v2;
>>
>> include "bar.php";
>>
>> }
> Assume that I know nothing about the stuffs inside bar.php...is it
> possible?
function foo(){
include_once('bar.php');
foreach(get_defined_vars() as $name =3D> $value){
if(!in_array($name, =
array('_GET','_POST','GLOBALS','_COOKIE','_SESSION','_ENV',' _FILES','_RE=
QUEST','_SERVER')))
$GLOBALS[$name] =3D $value;
}
}
It's really kinda ugly though.
-- =
Rik Wasmus
howa wrote:
>>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
> On 9 30 , 2 42 , Jerry Stuckle
>> howa wrote:
>>>>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>> On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
>>>> howa wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> I have a function, e.g.
>>>>> function foo() {
>>>>> include("bar.php");
>>>>> }
>>>>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>>>>> $global_v1 = "abc";
>>>>> $global_v2 = "def";
>>>>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
>>>>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
>>>> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>>> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>>>> --
>>>> ==================
>>>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>>>> Jerry Stuckle
>>>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>>>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>>>> ==================
>> >
>> > this can be solved by using include_once.
>> >
>> > the reason of using function call to include is we want to selectively
>> > include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
>> > method?)
>> >
>> >
>>
>> (Top posting fixed)
>>
>> It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
>> do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
>>
>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> ==================
>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>> Jerry Stuckle
>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>> ==================
>
>
>
> I am posting via Google Group, I am no control.
>
>
>
(Top posting fixed - again).
Here's a clue. There's a key on the right side of your keyboard. It
has a little arrow pointing down.
When you go to reply, you press that key until your cursor is at the end
of the message. Then you start posting your reply.
Other google groupers have figured that out. Why can't you?
A. Because they're either stoopid or just plain lazy.
Q. Why do they continue doing it?
A. People who refuse to post properly.
Q. Who are the most annoying people on the internet?
A. Because it upsets the normal flow of conversation.
Q. Why is it so bad?
A. Top posting.
Q. What is the most annoying thing on usenet?
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Jerry Stuckle"
news:v9udnTXx0NRPOGLbnZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@comcast.com...
> howa wrote:
>>>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>> On 9 30 , 2 42 , Jerry Stuckle
>>> howa wrote:
>>>>>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>>> On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
>>>>> howa wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> I have a function, e.g.
>>>>>> function foo() {
>>>>>> include("bar.php");
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>>>>>> $global_v1 = "abc";
>>>>>> $global_v2 = "def";
>>>>>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
>>>>>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
>>>>> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>>>> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>>>>> --
>>>>> ==================
>>>>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>>>>> Jerry Stuckle
>>>>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>>>>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>>>>> ==================
>>> >
>>> > this can be solved by using include_once.
>>> >
>>> > the reason of using function call to include is we want to
>>> selectively
>>> > include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
>>> > method?)
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> (Top posting fixed)
>>>
>>> It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
>>> do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
>>>
>>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ==================
>>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>>> Jerry Stuckle
>>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>>> ==================
>>
>>
> >
> > I am posting via Google Group, I am no control.
> >
> >
> >
>
> (Top posting fixed - again).
>
> Here's a clue. There's a key on the right side of your keyboard. It has
> a little arrow pointing down.
>
> When you go to reply, you press that key until your cursor is at the end
> of the message. Then you start posting your reply.
>
> Other google groupers have figured that out. Why can't you?
>
> A. Because they're either stoopid or just plain lazy.
> Q. Why do they continue doing it?
> A. People who refuse to post properly.
> Q. Who are the most annoying people on the internet?
> A. Because it upsets the normal flow of conversation.
> Q. Why is it so bad?
> A. Top posting.
> Q. What is the most annoying thing on usenet?
Jerry, as you know, I don't normally top post or botton post. I "in-line"
post. However,
(a) It is definitely NOT the most annoying thing on the internet and
(b) There are times when a top post is appropriate, such as a one-line thank
you, etc. It saves the reader from having to scroll down to find the new
message.
There are exceptions to all blanket statements -- including this one :-)
Shelly
Shelly wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle"
> news:v9udnTXx0NRPOGLbnZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> howa wrote:
>>>>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>>> On 9 30 , 2 42 , Jerry Stuckle
>>>> howa wrote:
>>>>>>> you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>>>> On 9 29 , 9 10 , Jerry Stuckle
>>>>>> howa wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>> I have a function, e.g.
>>>>>>> function foo() {
>>>>>>> include("bar.php");
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> and the bar.php contain contents e.g.
>>>>>>> $global_v1 = "abc";
>>>>>>> $global_v2 = "def";
>>>>>>> I want to execute function foo(), but at the same time, let the
>>>>>>> variables declared in bar.php to have global scopem is it possible?
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> You should not have an include within a function call. Among other
>>>>>> things, you 'll have problems if you call the function twice.
>>>>>> Actually, globals are bad things to use, anyway.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ==================
>>>>>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>>>>>> Jerry Stuckle
>>>>>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>>>>>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>>>>>> ==================
>>>> >
>>>> > this can be solved by using include_once.
>>>> >
>>>> > the reason of using function call to include is we want to
>>>> selectively
>>>> > include the needed files, prevent include useless files (i.e. factory
>>>> > method?)
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> (Top posting fixed)
>>>>
>>>> It isn't that much overhead to include an extra file or two. But if you
>>>> do that a lot, perhaps you should examine your methods.
>>>>
>>>> And please don't top post. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ==================
>>>> Remove the "x" from my email address
>>>> Jerry Stuckle
>>>> JDS Computer Training Corp.
>>>> jstuck...@attglobal.net
>>>> ==================
>>>
>>>
>>> I am posting via Google Group, I am no control.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> (Top posting fixed - again).
>>
>> Here's a clue. There's a key on the right side of your keyboard. It has
>> a little arrow pointing down.
>>
>> When you go to reply, you press that key until your cursor is at the end
>> of the message. Then you start posting your reply.
>>
>> Other google groupers have figured that out. Why can't you?
>>
>> A. Because they're either stoopid or just plain lazy.
>> Q. Why do they continue doing it?
>> A. People who refuse to post properly.
>> Q. Who are the most annoying people on the internet?
>> A. Because it upsets the normal flow of conversation.
>> Q. Why is it so bad?
>> A. Top posting.
>> Q. What is the most annoying thing on usenet?
>
> Jerry, as you know, I don't normally top post or botton post. I "in-line"
> post. However,
> (a) It is definitely NOT the most annoying thing on the internet and
> (b) There are times when a top post is appropriate, such as a one-line thank
> you, etc. It saves the reader from having to scroll down to find the new
> message.
>
> There are exceptions to all blanket statements -- including this one :-)
>
> Shelly
>
>
That's your opinion. A lot of people disagree with you.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Shelly"
news:13fvaq7lj1skj37@corp.supernews.com...
> "Jerry Stuckle"
> Jerry, as you know, I don't normally top post or botton post. I "in-line"
> post. However,
> (a) It is definitely NOT the most annoying thing on the internet and
Hahaha.
That's the funniest thing every written on the Internet. ;)
> Other google groupers have figured that out. Why can't you?
LOL when I post it automatically takes the pointer to the lower part,
so I don't have to press the down button.
And why is top posting so bad? Because of your Usenet Software?
Bruno Barros wrote:
>> Other google groupers have figured that out. Why can't you?
>
> LOL when I post it automatically takes the pointer to the lower part,
> so I don't have to press the down button.
>
> And why is top posting so bad? Because of your Usenet Software?
>
A. Because it upsets the normal flow of conversation.
Q. Why is top posting so bad?
Also, most usenet groups (including this one) have standards about
posting, to make it easier for everyone. And this one includes in-line
or bottom posting, but not top posting.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================