Re: RFC 76 (v2) Builtin: reduce

[John Porter]

Nathan Wiger wrote:
> 
> Since undef() has established semantics, I don't think these should
> change. I believe taking from RDBMS and adding null() which has the
> correct NULL semantics is the way it should go.

You realize, I hope, that there is no end of different "special non-value"
semantics.  Perl had one, now you're proposing a second.  RDBMS gurus
have as many as 29.  One step down that path is a bad precedent.
undef is sufficient.  Let there be operators for implementing the various
semantics, NOT new special non-value values.

-- 
John Porter

        We're building the house of the future together.