views:

120

answers:

4

So, I don't come from a huge PHP background—and I was wondering if in well formed code, one should use the 'superglobals' directly, e.g. in the middle of some function say $_SESSION['x'] = 'y'; or if, like I'd normally do with variables, it's better to send them as arguments that can be used from there, e.g:

class Doer {
    private $sess;
    public function __construct(&$sess) {
        $this->sess =& $sess;
    }
} 

$doer = new Doer($_SESSION);

and then use the Doer->sess version from within Doer and such. (The advantage of this method is that it makes clear that Doer uses $_SESSION.)

What's the accepted PHP design approach for this problem?

A: 

This is not good use of PHP.

get $_SESSION variables directly:

$id   = $_SESSION['id'];
$hash = $_SESSION['hash'];

etc.

Aziz
A: 

I would not recommend at all passing superglobal by reference. In your class, it's unclear that what you are modifying is a session variable. Also, keep in mind that $_SESSION is available everywhere outside your class. It's so wrong from a object oriented point of view to be able to modify a variable inside a class from outside that class by modifying a variable that is not related to the class. Having public attribute is consider to be a bad practice, this is even worst.

HoLyVieR
+3  A: 

I do like to wrap $_SESSION, $_POST, $_GET, and $_COOKIE into OOP structures.

I use this method to centralize code that handles sanitation and validation, all of the necessary isset () checks, nonces, setcookie parameters, etc. It also allows client code to be more readable (and gives me the illusion that it's more maintainable).

It may be difficult to enforce use of this kind of structure, especially if there are multiple coders. With $_GET, $_POST, and $_COOKIE (I believe), your initialization code can copy the data, then destroy the superglobal. Maybe a clever destructor could make this possible with $_SESSION (wipe $_SESSION on load, write it back in the destructor), though I haven't tried.

I don't usually use any of these enforcement techniques, though. After getting used to it, seeing $_SESSION in code outside the session class just looks strange, and I mostly work solo.

EDIT
Here's some sample client code, in case it helps somebody. I'm sure looking at any of the major frameworks would give you better ideas...

$post = Post::load ();  
$post->numeric ('member_age');  
$post->email ('member_email');
$post->match ('/regex/','member_field');
$post->required ('member_first_name','member_email');
$post->inSet ('member_status',array('unemployed','retired','part-time','full-time'));
$post->money ('member_salary');
$post->register ('member_last_name'); // no specific requirements, but we want access
if ($post->isValid())
{
  // do good stuff
  $firstName = $post->member_first_name;
}
else
{
  // do error stuff
}

Post and its friends all derive from a base class that implements the core validation code, adding their own specific functionality like form tokens, session cookie configuration, whatever.

Internally, the class holds a collection of valid data that's extracted from $_POST as the validation methods are called, then returns them as properties using a magic __get method. Failed fields can't be accessed this way. My validation methods (except required) don't fail on empty fields, and many of them use func_get_args to allow them to operate on multiple fields at once. Some of the methods (like money) automatically translate the data into custom value types.

In the error case, I have a way to transform the data into a format that can be saved in the session and used to pre-populate the form and highlight errors after redirecting to the original form.

One way to improve on this would be to store the validation info in a Form class that's used to render the form and power client-side validation, as well as cleaning the data after submission.

grossvogel
**Gimme!** Would you publish your OOP wrappers for the input arrays? I'm using something similar, and would like to contrast the approach with something comparable.
mario
@mario: I can't publish the code, but I can elaborate a little to give you an idea. I'll edit the answer now.
grossvogel
@grossvogel: that's alright. But mine is here for comparison: https://sourceforge.net/p/php7framework/wiki/input/ - just wanted to know which kind of utility features you use, or which filters you deem most useful.
mario
@mario: Cool. I really like the chaining feature. Thanks for sharing!
grossvogel
A: 

Modifying the contents of the superglobals is considered poor practice. While there's nothing really wrong with it, especially if the code is 100% under your control, it can lead to unexpected side effects, especially when you consider mixed-source code. For instance, if you do something like this:

$_POST['someval'] = mysql_real_escape_string($_POST['someval']);

you might expect that everywhere PHP makes that 'someval' available would also get changed, but this is not the case. The copy in $_REQUEST['someval'] will be unchanged and still the original "unsafe" version. This could lead to an unintentional injection vulnerability if you do all your escaping on $_POST, but a later library uses $_REQUEST and assumes it's been escaped already.

As such, even if you can modify them, it's best to treat the superglobals as read-only. If you have to mess with the values, maintain your own parallel copies and do whatever wrappers/access methods required to maintain that copy.

Marc B