答案已经给出了，但关于表现的虚假信息太多了。 我写了这个小的基准测试脚本，它显示foreach方法是最快的。

免责声明:以下方法是从其他答案复制粘贴的

<?php

function method_1(Array &$arr) {
    return $arr === array_values($arr);
}

function method_2(Array &$arr) {
    for (reset($arr), $i = 0; key($arr) !== $i++; next($arr));
    return is_null(key($arr));
}

function method_3(Array &$arr) {
    return array_keys($arr) === range(0, count($arr) - 1);
}

function method_4(Array &$arr) {
    $idx = 0;
    foreach( $arr as $key => $val ){
        if( $key !== $idx )
            return FALSE;
        $idx++;
    }
    return TRUE;
}




function benchmark(Array $methods, Array &$target){    
    foreach($methods as $method){
        $start = microtime(true);
        for ($i = 0; $i < 1000; $i++)
            $dummy = call_user_func($method, $target);

        $end = microtime(true);
        echo "Time taken with $method = ".round(($end-$start)*1000.0,3)."ms\n";
    }
}



$targets = [
    'Huge array' => range(0, 30000),
    'Small array' => range(0, 1000),
];
$methods = [
    'method_1',
    'method_2',
    'method_3',
    'method_4',
];
foreach($targets as $targetName => $target){
    echo "==== Benchmark using $targetName ====\n";
    benchmark($methods, $target);
    echo "\n";
}

结果:

==== Benchmark using Huge array ====
Time taken with method_1 = 5504.632ms
Time taken with method_2 = 4509.445ms
Time taken with method_3 = 8614.883ms
Time taken with method_4 = 2720.934ms

==== Benchmark using Small array ====
Time taken with method_1 = 77.159ms
Time taken with method_2 = 130.03ms
Time taken with method_3 = 160.866ms
Time taken with method_4 = 69.946ms

我注意到这个问题有两种常用的方法:一种使用array_values()，另一种使用key()。为了找出哪个更快，我写了一个小程序:

$arrays = Array(
  'Array #1' => Array(1, 2, 3, 54, 23, 212, 123, 1, 1),
  'Array #2' => Array("Stack", 1.5, 20, Array(3.4)),
  'Array #3' => Array(1 => 4, 2 => 2),
  'Array #4' => Array(3.0, "2", 3000, "Stack", 5 => "4"),
  'Array #5' => Array("3" => 4, "2" => 2),
  'Array #6' => Array("0" => "One", 1.0 => "Two", 2 => "Three"),
  'Array #7' => Array(3 => "asdf", 4 => "asdf"),
  'Array #8' => Array("apple" => 1, "orange" => 2),
);

function is_indexed_array_1(Array &$arr) {
  return $arr === array_values($arr);
}

function is_indexed_array_2(Array &$arr) {
  for (reset($arr), $i = 0; key($arr) === $i++; next($arr))
    ;
  return is_null(key($arr));
}

// Method #1
$start = microtime(true);
for ($i = 0; $i < 1000; $i++) {
  foreach ($arrays as $array) {
    $dummy = is_indexed_array_1($array);
  }
}
$end = microtime(true);
echo "Time taken with method #1 = ".round(($end-$start)*1000.0,3)."ms\n";

// Method #2
$start = microtime(true);
for ($i = 0; $i < 1000; $i++) {
  foreach ($arrays as $array) {
    $dummy = is_indexed_array_2($array);
  }
}
$end = microtime(true);
echo "Time taken with method #1 = ".round(($end-$start)*1000.0,3)."ms\n";

该程序在CentOS上的PHP 5.2上的输出如下:

方法#1所花费的时间= 10.745ms 方法#2所花费的时间= 18.239ms

PHP 5.3上的输出产生了类似的结果。显然，使用array_values()要快得多。

这是函数-

public function is_assoc_array($array){

    if(is_array($array) !== true){
        return false;
    }else{

        $check = json_decode(json_encode($array));

        if(is_object($check) === true){
            return true;
        }else{
            return false;
        }

    }

}

一些例子

    print_r((is_assoc_array(['one','two','three']))===true?'Yes':'No'); \\No
    print_r(is_assoc_array(['one'=>'one','two'=>'two','three'=>'three'])?'Yes':'No'); \\Yes
    print_r(is_assoc_array(['1'=>'one','2'=>'two','3'=>'three'])?'Yes':'No'); \\Yes
    print_r(is_assoc_array(['0'=>'one','1'=>'two','2'=>'three'])?'Yes':'No'); \\No

在其中一个答案中@devios1有一个类似的解决方案，但这只是使用PHP的内置json相关函数的另一种方式。我还没有检查这个解决方案在性能方面如何与其他已经在这里发布的解决方案相比。但它确实帮助我解决了这个问题。希望这能有所帮助。

这个函数可以处理:

索引有孔的数组(例如1、2、4、5、8、10) 带有“0x”键的数组:例如，键“08”是关联的，键“8”是顺序的。

思想很简单:如果其中一个键不是整数，它就是关联数组，否则就是顺序数组。

function is_asso($a){
    foreach(array_keys($a) as $key) {if (!is_int($key)) return TRUE;}
    return FALSE;
}

下面是我使用的方法:

function is_associative ( $a )
{
    return in_array(false, array_map('is_numeric', array_keys($a)));
}

assert( true === is_associative(array(1, 2, 3, 4)) );

assert( false === is_associative(array('foo' => 'bar', 'bar' => 'baz')) );

assert( false === is_associative(array(1, 2, 3, 'foo' => 'bar')) );

注意，这并不包括特殊情况，如:

$a = array( 1, 2, 3, 4 );

unset($a[1]);

assert( true === is_associative($a) );

对不起，我帮不了你。对于大小合适的数组，它也有一定的性能，因为它不会产生不必要的拷贝。正是这些小细节使得Python和Ruby编写起来更加方便……: P

我认为下面两个函数是最好的方法去检查'如果一个数组是结合或数字'。由于'numeric'可能只表示数字键或顺序数字键，下面列出了两个函数来检查这两种情况:

function is_indexed_array(&$arr) {
  for (reset($arr); is_int(key($arr)); next($arr));
  return is_null(key($arr));
}

function is_sequential_array(&$arr, $base = 0) {
  for (reset($arr), $base = (int) $base; key($arr) === $base++; next($arr));
  return is_null(key($arr));
}

The first function checks if each key is an integer value. The second function checks if each key is an integer value and in addition checks if all keys are sequential starting at $base, which defaults to 0 and thus can be omitted if you do not need to specify another base value. key($my_array) returns null if the read pointer is moved past the end of the array, which is what ends the for loop and makes the statement after the for loop return true if all keys were integer. If not, the loop ends prematurely because a key is of type string, and the statement after the for loop will return false. The latter function in addition adds one to $base after each compare, to be able to check if the next key is of the correct value. The strict compare makes it also check if the key is of type integer. The $base = (int) $base part in the first section of the for loop can be left out when $base is omitted or if you make sure it is only called using an integer. But since I can't be sure for everybody, I left it in. The statement is executed only once, anyway. I think these are the most efficient solutions:

Memory wise: No copying of data or key ranges. Doing an array_values or array_keys may seem shorter (less code) but keep in mind what goes on in the background once you make that call. Yes there are more (visible) statements than in some other solutions, but that is not what counts, is it? Time wise: Besides the fact that copying/extracting data and/or keys also takes time, this solution is more efficient than doing a foreach. Again a foreach may seem more efficient to some because it is shorter in notation, but in the background foreach also calls reset, key and next to do it's looping. But in addition it also calls valid to check the end condition, which is avoided here due to the combination with the integer check.

请记住，数组键只能是整数或字符串，严格的数字字符串，如“1”(但不是“01”)将被转换为整数。如果您希望数组是顺序的，这使得检查整数键成为除了计数之外唯一需要的操作。当然，如果is_indexed_array返回false，则可以将该数组视为关联数组。我说“见过”，因为事实上它们都是。