Hi! > Shouldn't this fail a little bit more obvious (-> "loud")? And how is > this even possible?
Well, for example - __unset is required to do X before unsetting variable but X fails for one reason or another and the logic dictates that you can not unset unless X is done (for a real life example, try exiting an app like word processor with content unsaved and when it asks you to save/discard/cancel, click on cancel. Bingo - unset interrupted :). > or there was > nothing to unset (i.e., it is still not set)? > > > So I guess this is the only useful behaviour. However, I have no idea, This behavior is already covered by isset, why duplicate it? If - and I have no idea why - you cared if the variable was set or not, why not just do isset? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
