Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75224
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.128.179 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.0.999.1407031342330.2935@swan.dds.nl>
References: <alpine.LNX.0.999.1407031108350.526@swan.dds.nl>
	<CAEZPtU5KoZ2BByGWJeVVxHV3L7rOJjFNjQ_i1-xFnR2vSm-X3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.LNX.0.999.1407031342330.2935@swan.dds.nl>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 19:56:26 +0800
Message-ID: <CAHMUw2Gu1Dt4eTSULLvEnDorgrGNrCK7pv-W_gEQToYtKv2jqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xen <xen@dds.nl>
Cc: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1135e9b6d0f33b04fd48b2aa
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] not_null function
From: tjerk.meesters@gmail.com (Tjerk Meesters)

--001a1135e9b6d0f33b04fd48b2aa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Xen <xen@dds.nl> wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Jul 2014, Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>  that's why we have is_null, and NULL is a type, not a value btw.
>>
>> also isset is an operator, not a function. (referred in other replies).
>>
>
> Alright, I stand corrected. But if NULL or null is a type, then comparing
> against it with == or === would also be wrong, right?


Technically, yes; but in an expression `null` is also the representative
value for the type `null` as a convenient way to check whether something is
of the type `null`.


>
>
>  is_null is consistent with the other is_* functions. A programming
>> language is not a natural language so grammatical or semantic
>> imperfections are totally valid.
>>
>
> That is just your unfounded opinion. In my view, which I believe is based
> on the reasoning that I have espoused today, and just now, semantics are
> important because when things are meaningless they confuse us people. And
> us programmers are people who use language. And we require language to be
> natural and congruent so we can easily grasp it and avoid making errors. As
> to the "practical" implications that Andrey Andreeve mentioned in his reply.
>
> I shall not reply to that message, but if you insist on arguing that
> semantics are irrelevant to any degree, you are basically arguing that
> there is a good reason to make language harder to understand, read and
> write because of some other reason that has nothing to do with it (like how
> many constructs already exist).
>
>
>  between the is_* functions, isset or ?:, I do not see a need to add
>> the exact same features for a non technical reason.
>>
>
> That is find if you see it that way, but I would rather have you answer
> with reasoning and arguments instead of just opinions and statements.
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
--
Tjerk

--001a1135e9b6d0f33b04fd48b2aa--