Posted by Steve on 01/07/08 19:21

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:RpOdnQ9zfpsl7h_anZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Steve wrote:
>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:jO2dnY2_t8l5jh_anZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> Steve wrote:
>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:5pCdnYoQjrhRAhzanZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:7pCdnciBY-RFc-PanZ2dnUVZ_sTinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>>>> <PASTED FROM ALT.PHP>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:6KmdnRk59_ChqOPanZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>>>> adam.timberlake@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I was reading the following article yesterday:
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.talkphp.com/vbarticles.php?do=article&articleid=41&title=using-the-internal-array-pointers-to-access-elements-in-arrays
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What struck me while reading it was how very little we hear about
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> array internal pointers !! I've been in PHP now for a good 2
>>>>>>>>>> years,
>>>>>>>>>> and I've never heard these little guys mentioned before.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My question is... what do you use internal pointers for, and why?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I use them a fair amount. Sometimes you need to run through an
>>>>>>>>> array,
>>>>>>>>> and foreach() just doesn't do what you need (or makes the code
>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> complicated).
>>>>>>>> lol. you get on to the op for multiposting and tell him you've
>>>>>>>> answered his question here. this is an answer?! your only good
>>>>>>>> point was not multiposting. however, i'm sure no one in
>>>>>>>> comp.lang.php will miss this 'answer'...as it does nothing for
>>>>>>>> anyone.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> why not tell the op *how* you use them and give an example of *how*
>>>>>>>> your use does something that foreach doesn't (or doesn't easily)
>>>>>>>> do? hell, i'd be very interested in THAT myself. i can't think of a
>>>>>>>> situation that would apply.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a better answer is that most languages have these constructs.
>>>>>>>> typically in more formal languages there is an iterator interface
>>>>>>>> whereby you can can impliment into a strongly typed collection
>>>>>>>> object that will contain only those types of items. your
>>>>>>>> implimenting object/collection keeps track of the 'pointer' spoken
>>>>>>>> about in the article and exposes those standard pointer functions.
>>>>>>>> implementing said interface allows the language to iterate, i.e.
>>>>>>>> foreach, the items even though you may have heavily customized your
>>>>>>>> collection. i would assume that having said little known pointer
>>>>>>>> functions would allow forward compatibility should php start to
>>>>>>>> become more strongly data typed in future versions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> AND OAN, funny how the writer of the article uses the word internal
>>>>>>>> 'pointer'. count how many times. i couldn't be laughing harder.
>>>>>>> So now you've gone from a troll to a stalker! I think you're hung
>>>>>>> up on me, Stevie!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And BTW - he asked a question - I answered it. He didn't ask HOW to
>>>>>>> use them. Just IF anyone used them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Learn to read, STALKER!
>>>>>> yes, please do!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (notice the key words)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "My question is... *what* do you use internal pointers for, and
>>>>>> *why*?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the question was NOT *does* anyone use them...which is the question
>>>>>> you made up to answer. you didn't address any of his questions. read
>>>>>> more carefully, jerry-berry.
>>>>> ROFLMAO, stalker. And your attempts at third grade insults again show
>>>>> your maturity level. We already know your intellect - or actually,
>>>>> the lack there of.
>>>> yet, your ad-hom's do nothing for your demonstrated lack of literacy.
>>>> quote your answer and show exactly where it is that you covered 'what'
>>>> and 'why'.
>>>>
>>>> <crickets chirping>
>>> No ad hominems, stalker. Just the truth.
>>
>> true or false doesn't an ad-hom make. you're trying to divert attention
>> to the fact that you said i can't read, yet demonstrate that you clearly
>> did/can not. 'what' and 'why', jer.
>>
>> <crickets *still* chirping>
>
> ROFLMAO, Stalker!

if it's funny for you, in your ignorance, then imagine how much greater
*our* humor. it's doubled because of your obliviousness. if you *could*
read, you'd have dropped it by now out of embarassment.

[Back to original message]