<?
class Util {
static function arg($name, $default = null) {
return (self::arg_p($name, self::arg_g($name, $default)));
}
static function arg_g($name, $default = null) {
return (isset($_GET[$name]))?$_GET[$name]:$default;
}
static function arg_p($name, $default = null) {
return (isset($_POST[$name]))?$_POST[$name]:$default;
}
}
?>
Refactorings
No refactoring yet !
Paul Kemper
October 5, 2007, October 05, 2007 01:16, permalink
<?php
class Util
{
static function arg( $name, $default = null )
{
// This construction avoids calls to the extra methods
// Note that it does not take care of the GPC order settings in php.ini but for your purposes it might be enough
return isset($_POST[$name])?$_POST[$name]:(isset($_GET[$name])?$_GET[$name]:$default);
}
}
Mark
October 5, 2007, October 05, 2007 01:43, permalink
I would not make a generic function to grab things from both the POST and GET, because it makes your website behave 'weird' if you expect a variable to come from the _GET array and some unknown user puts the same var in the _POST array
Or on a certain day in the future you (or a college) will make a form to submit var 'x' which also happens to be in the GET array to do funky stuff... weird stuff will happen and the college will have a hard time to find it.
JWvdV
October 5, 2007, October 05, 2007 08:04, permalink
I thougth that $_REQUEST is for things like this? Only your cookies are also in $_REQUEST.
AlliXSenoS
October 5, 2007, October 05, 2007 08:34, permalink
re: paul
is the code duplication worth the microscopic time save from two function calls?
re: mark
if the user wants to tamper with data, it's easier to do it in the querystring anyway... the combo function is meant for specific cases where I usually want a value from the querystring but might see a POST form here and there and want to read the value out from that, the arg_g and the arg_p are meant to be a lot more commonly used
Don Wilson
October 5, 2007, October 05, 2007 22:40, permalink
Useless, bloated code IMHO.
JWvdV
October 6, 2007, October 06, 2007 06:14, permalink
@Don: I completely agree with you. I don't see the benefit of this code...
Mike Weller
October 11, 2007, October 11, 2007 14:55, permalink
Combining GET and POST is also bad from a security perspective. You don't want to allow GET requests for important POST functions like changing a user profile, because some h4x0r will start sending links around which are the GET versions of those actions, and some poor noobs (or worse, an admin) will click the link and do some damage. Keeping stuff POST only is good practice, but you also have to protect against CSRF with canary values etc.
any thought on this?