Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >That's an empty string. In any case, if you really want to call it a
> >null string, that's fine, just a little more likely to be
> >misinterpreted.
>
> In Perl, this is the null string: ""
> In Perl, this is the null character: "\0"
> In Perl, this is the null list: ()
In RFC 263, this is the null: null
That's a different word for a different concept. No conflict, if you
learn the way the RFC speaks.
> It's a shame you don't like it, but this is the way we speak.
What's this we and you business? I'm a perl user too.
> If you wish to make sense of the documentation, you must learn
> its language.
The documentation isn't all that consistent about everything, either.
Perhaps you, personally, are more so, and if so, perhaps you should help
rewrite the documentation to make it as perfectly consistent as yourself.
I allowed that you might want to call it the null string, and I'm allowed
to read "null string" and think "empty string", and I'm just as right as
you are. You must not have a cohesive argument to make, if you resort to
insults in an attempt to make points.
--
Glenn
=====
Even if you're on the right track,
you'll get run over if you just sit there.
-- Will Rogers
____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633
___________________________________________________________
