On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 14:41, Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 16:53 16/08/2003, Robert Cummings wrote: > >So it seems to me that a null value does not define the non-existence of > >a value, but is itself actually a value. And this as far as I am > >concerned is quite valid. > > Ok, but it still doesn't change the fact that null is not a value :) The > fact we couldn't make the implementation perfect doesn't change that in any > way. > I mentioned ways to implement the desired behavior, others also mentioned > other ways - but there's no way I'd support adding functionality that will > encourage inconsistency in the language. > > Zeev
But the change would make it more consistent, by recognizing that a variable with a NULL value is still defined. Pretending that $foo = null and unset($foo) are the same thing is quite inconsistent and confusing for many, when there are ways (i.e. get_defined_vars()) to prove that they are not the same. -- Torben Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +1.604.709.0506 http://www.thebuttlesschaps.com http://www.inflatableeye.com http://www.hybrid17.com http://www.themainonmain.com -----==== Boycott Starbucks! http://www.haidabuckscafe.com ====----- -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
