https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=37380
--- Comment #13 from Tomás Cohen Arazi <[email protected]> --- Hi, I rolled back with making it return undef. As I noticed the tradeoff was not good. We ended up having to add `// q{}` in a bunch of places, which is not worth. Tests and code have been adjusting to go back to the old behavior. I wanted to share that I made some exhaustive tests on MARC::Record and MARC::Field behavior... ``` perl -MDDP \ -MMARC::File::XML \ -MMARC::Record \ -MMARC::Field \ -e 'my $f = MARC::Field->new( "001", undef); p($f->data); my $r = MARC::Record->new(); $r->append_fields($f); $r->append_fields(MARC::Field->new("245", "", "", a => "Stuff")); my $xml = $r->as_xml; $r = MARC::Record->new_from_xml($xml); p($r->as_xml);' ``` My conclusion is that MARC::Field allows adding `undef` values but it will then warn when appending them. But I also found out that once the record gets serialized as XML, the `undef` is replaced by an empty string and that's how it is going to stay forever, with our code. So having `undef` is a weird artificially created scenario. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
