Add required_value attribute to s2MOP shortcode.

[raamdev]

Resolves wpsharks/s2member#305.

@jaswsinc I've tested this and it seems to work as expected but would appreciate a code review:

• If required_type="" contains multiple values (e.g., required_type="ccap|level"), the required_value="" attribute is ignored.
• The new required_value="" attribute supports multiple values (e.g., required_value="0|1|2" or required_value="ccap1|ccap2|ccap3")

Tested with these shortcodes:

[s2MOP required_type="ccap" required_value="free_gift"]This content required a Custom Capability called <code>free_gift</code>[/s2MOP]

[s2MOP required_type="level" required_value="0|1"]You were trying to access a Post that requires Level <code>0</code> or <code>1</code>[/s2MOP]

[raamdev]

@jaswsinc I'm not sure if there is a cleaner way referencing the value of one array ($_g['_s2member_req']['type']) inside another, as I did here:

$_g['_s2member_req'][$_g['_s2member_req']['type']]

It looks hard to read, but the only alternative--assigning that value to a separate variable and then using the variable in the array--seemed like a lot of extra code (assigning the value and then unsetting the value).

[jaswrks]

I think it would be fine to create another variable to help make this clearer. What you have is fine too. I just mean to say that (for me) I would be OK with another few lines of code if that makes it's easier to read, understand, and come back to in the future.

[raamdev]

I think it would be fine to create another variable to help make this clearer.

Cool. Thanks! I've updated this line for clarity.

[jaswrks]

The new required_value="" attribute supports multiple values (e.g., required_value="0|1|2" or required_value="ccap1|ccap2|ccap3")

Cool! Love the way you set things up.

I was looking at this line. I think we should add required_value to that array of shortcode attributes that are accepted (see also: shortcode_atts reference).

Also, in this block the use of isset() seems a little misleading. These values will always be set here, but they might be empty in some cases.

[raamdev]

I was looking at this line. I think we should add required_value to that array of shortcode attributes that are accepted (see also: shortcode_atts reference).

Weird. I thought I added that there. Thanks for catching that.

Also, in this block the use of isset() seems a little misleading. These values will always be set here, but they might be empty in some cases.

Ah, good point. I removed the isset() checks in that block of code. You're right: they serve no purpose. In fact, we don't even need to verify if the values are empty or not, since the following array_intersect() statement validates the shortcode attribute values anyway.

[jaswrks]

Great, thanks @raamdev 👍