Anthony Ferrara wrote:
I voted for the ability to use an expression for isset() as well, since I agree with Ferenc, it's a matter of consistency. Sure, the use-case for isset() is definitely weaker than for empty(), but at the same token they are definitely related...
I just can't help feeling that it is the wrong use of both. If the function is returning a value, then it's returning a value that needs to be used somewhere so the work flow handles that. If the function returns nothing instead that just seems wrong and needs to be handled better. I'm used to getting back 'false' if the function failed and just check for that so why would there be any logical reason for using isset or empty to check a function return?
-- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
