2

Here's my scenario:

$foo = bar;

one()
{
   two()
   {
      three()
      {
         // need access to $foo here
      }
   }
}

I know I could pass $foo down all three functions, but that isn't really ideal, because you may or may not require it, besides, there are other parameters already and I don't want to add to that list if I can prevent it. It's only when you get to three() do you need $foo. I know I could also specify global $foo; in three(), but I read that this wasn't a good practice.

Is there another way $foo can be made available to three() without doing either of those?

To provide a little more info, $foo in this case is info on how to connect to the database e.g. server, user, pass, but only in three() does it actually need that info. Of course I could connect to the database right as the document loads, but that feels unecessary if the document might not need it.

Any ideas?

UPDATE: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to have "function" at the beginning of each function implying that I was created them in a nested way.

Improve this question
2
  • Are you really using nested functions for real? Commented May 13, 2011 at 20:24
  • As a general rule, don't ever nest function definitions... it's a pointless exercise in both code and coder confuscation Commented May 13, 2011 at 20:24

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
4

Yes, you can use global, or pass it through as a parameter. Both are fair ways. However, I'd do the latter. Or, you can also use closures and the use keyword:

$foo = 'bar';

$one = function() use($foo) {
   $two = function() use($foo) {
      $three = function () use($foo) {
         // access to $foo here
      };
   };
};

Can also be use(&$foo) if you need to modify the top $foo's value inside of $three()

Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

2

Using global is not a bad practice if used properly. This case you would use global and it will be totally fine.

Since global makes functions get access to global variables, there are data corruption risks. Just make sure to use with caution and you know what you're doing (i.e. not accidentally change the data that you don't want it to change. This sometimes causes some nasty bugs that's hard to track.)

Summarize: global in this case is perfectly fine.

What's really bad is nested functions, at least in PHP.

Improve this answer

5 Comments

"What's really bad is nested functions, at least in PHP." -- why so?
Using global IS bad practice absolutely ALWAYS.
@OZ_ With great power comes great responsibilities. As long as you practise safe global usage, you'll be fine.
@Ryan, it's bad because it makes the code difficult to read. Also the inside function only exist inside the wrapper function. Rule of Thumb: Simplicity is better than complexity.
there is no any 'safe' using for global. It's self-delusion.
-1

Don't listen anybody, who are speaking about global.
Read books about OOP (e.g. this one), read about Dependency Injection, Factory-patterns.
Dependency Injection is the best way to create flexible and easy-to-maintain code, and by DI philosophy you will pass $foo from first to third function in arguments, or will pass Context object with all necessary variables (if you want to minimize count of arguments).
More about DI you can read here: http://components.symfony-project.org/dependency-injection/trunk/book/00-Introduction

Improve this answer

12 Comments

You're not really explaining why global is bad practice in this situation. PHP is technically OOP, but is rarely used in any sort of complex OOP structure.
@melkamo global is evil in any situation. This code can not be reused, can not be moved in code, can not be tested and very hard in refactoring.
Well, that depends entirely on the purpose of the function. Not all functions are standalone entities that you'd want to move around. Nor should they all have to be.
@OZ_: Once again, you fail to explain. Tell me this: if I have a series of private functions inside a class, and the class is a well-defined entity that will not be broken down into parts, that what could I possibly lose from using global variables within its private functions? Nothing.
@melkamo you fail to explain lol, I just won't spend my time to explain obvious things. If you use global in your code - your code smells. So man, don't play in once again, go read some books.
|

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.