In my humble opinion 'null' is a 'pseudovalue' that has been made
available for some time. If it was never intended for a script to be able
to use it, it should never have been exposed. But it has been and many
people, myself included, are using it.
It is particularly useful to mark a value that has not yet been filled.
The same way NULL is used in SQL. If you take out this behaviour there is
no 'pseudo-value' to indicate the absence of value and we will go back to
using 0 or constants, a hack at best.
Also, I see a distinction semantically between isset and key_exists. Isset
asks whether it is set to a tangible value. Key_exists asks whether the
array contains an entry, any entry, for that key.
My 2 cents,
David
--
|> /+\ \| | |>
David Croft
Infotrek
On Thu, 3 May 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 17:20 3/5/2001, Cynic wrote:
> >I very much agree with Andrei on this. Please, keep the
> >existing functionality.
> >
> >Although, I'm not familiar with any issues possibly connected
> >with this. Does it hurt anything?
>
> Yes, it requires adding of functions that duplicate isset()'s behavior in a
> way that may change in the future (implementation dependent).
>
> Zeev
>
>
> --
> 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]
>
>
--
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]
