> > Please revert your patch. I mean the change from &null; to NULL. > > &null; means something of type NULL. > The sentences where he changed &null; => NULL were > talking about the NULL type itself, and not > something of type NULL.
Indeed, &null; is a value, in this context I don't mean the value NULL, but the type NULL, two very different things. I'll clarify the meaning of &true;, etc in the documentation. This change will also render the TOC of the types section better, i.e. no strange makeup of the NULL type. --Jeroen
