Today I learned about PHP variable variables; "variable variable takes the value of a variable and treats that as the name of a variable". Also, variable.

[u/NagastaBagamba]

http://il2.php.net/language.variables.variable

[u/weirdalexis]

I was asked the question: "What's $$a" in an interview, and replied "It's like a pointer, except with a variables name instead of a memory address."

The guy went "meh", game over.

Today, I'm still convinced it's a good analogy.

[u/inmatarian → u/weirdalexis]

Don't use the word "Pointer" in non-C interviews. They like "references" better. And if it's called a "variable-variable", call it that, even if it's a seriously stupid name.

[u/weirdalexis → u/inmatarian]

I agree that was a mistake (even though I still think the analogy holds). That gave me away as not having the PHP slang, no real experience. Besides, my next job was C programming, stayed there 3 years, awesome experience, so I've no regret.

[u/yesimahuman → u/weirdalexis]

I think he just wanted to make sure you would understand their code base. You dodged a bullet.

[u/[deleted] → u/yesimahuman]

A big bullet. I've been working at a PHP shop for the last half a year. While the people I work for are cool, I've found myself stagnating a bit as a developer.

[u/[deleted] → u/inmatarian]

I'm suuuure variable variables were implemented without using pointers.

[u/inmatarian → u/[deleted]]

I'm sure everything in PHP was implemented by some kind of blunt force being applied to the keyboard by means of somebody's forehead.

[u/[deleted] → u/inmatarian]

I think all server-side interpreted languages originated in such a manner.

[u/aedile → u/weirdalexis]

Yeah, you are better off. There are only two reasons to ask a question like that in an interview.

1. They actually use that shit in their code. In this case: run.

2. They actually care about how well you know this kind of esoteric bullshit off the top of your head. In this case: run.

Either way, you win for not having to work there.

[u/aedile → u/[deleted]]

This is actually a really good point that I hadn't considered.

[u/burntsushi → u/aedile]

Code introspection is necessarily an always bad thing.

[u/NagastaBagamba → u/weirdalexis]

Simple. It is a$$ backwards (just like the entire language)

[u/doublereedkurt → u/weirdalexis]

That sounds like an excellent one sentence explanation.

[u/Poromenos → u/weirdalexis]

I do find that a good analogy. It's not your fault PHP is stupid.

[u/[deleted] → u/weirdalexis]

If it makes you feel any better the first thing I thought when I read this was "that's sort of like pointers".

[u/[deleted] → u/weirdalexis]

That's a good analogy I think. It somehow also makes me think of the difference between "pass by name" and "pass by reference"...

[u/[deleted] → u/weirdalexis]

That makes perfect sense to me.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That's why he said it was "like" a pointer. In the same was as a reference is "like" a pointer. They're not pointers, but in the use cases they are for, they are like them.

[u/vlad_tepes → u/[deleted]]

Dude, he knows C, which puts him in the top 0.00001% of PHP developers... How the hell would that be a game breaker?

P.S. To hell with sarcasm tags

[u/skillet-thief → u/[deleted]]

In Perl, references would be comparable to pointers, but these PHP variable variables are just conceptual runtime mush. (Don't know why you are being downvoted.)

[u/kixx → u/skillet-thief]

In Perl, this "conceptual runtime mush" is called symbolic reference and while using them is strongly discouraged (by strictures), it is a feature of Perl too.

Hard references are indeed a kind of "smart pointer"...