>isset() is not an internal function but a language construct. I disagree on
>the "using additional arguments for other stuff part". It's often very
>weird that functions behave differently according to the way they are
I've just done a quick count of the php functions which take an optional
extra argument to change their behaviour, and I stopped when I reached 100.
Fair enough, isset is a language construct, but most of the other
isblahs/ext_isblahs are functions, however your average php programmer won't
even know what this means, let alone be able to discriminate.
My point is that if you are going to do it to isset, AND the language is to
become more orthogonal then it MUST also be done to isanythingelse. I can
see that there are no nasty repercussions with using the technique for
isset, however there are many many isanythingelses and I'd be surprised if
we can apply the
reasoning across the board.
I don't want to stifle innovation here, I just want us to think beyond the
immediate problem when the language gets extended.
+44 (0)113 294 5112
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]