Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93530 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 41650 invoked from network); 25 May 2016 20:27:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 25 May 2016 20:27:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:49381] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E4/0C-14311-3BA06475 for ; Wed, 25 May 2016 16:27:32 -0400 Received: (qmail 12485 invoked by uid 89); 25 May 2016 20:27:28 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 12479, pid: 12482, t: 0.0696s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 25 May 2016 20:27:28 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <80.72.63510.DAFA5475@pb1.pair.com> <68fd73e7-ad19-3758-7b7a-6013cc26385f@gmail.com> <11.87.14311.EC5E5475@pb1.pair.com> <46620281-18af-094f-d484-8fc69bd7dc11@gmail.com> <557bd7db-b400-73b8-835d-6a03396f7fb5@fleshgrinder.com> Message-ID: <57460AB0.5060006@lsces.co.uk> Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 21:27:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <557bd7db-b400-73b8-835d-6a03396f7fb5@fleshgrinder.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 25/05/16 20:40, Fleshgrinder wrote: > In other words, unset is not really unset already! > > QED: Preserving *all* attributes of a property is the only consistent > way. However, preserving its value is not. > > I do not think that there is a problem together with the typed > properties, nullability, and unset simply because the property is not > explicitly assigned null by unset, it is being undefined. Am I missing something here? If I have any variable defined, it has a current state which may or may not include a value. If I 'unset' that variable then it's 'object' is simply removed from the list of variables, so creating a new variable which happens to have the same name is totally unrelated. I would still prefer that all this gloss being added to a sub set of variables was addressing the whole problem, but a variable is always a name and a value which may or may not be set along with a 'now' few more attributes to constrain what that value is restricted to contain. unset simply removes that name and content from the list and leaving any 'trail' which prevents creating a totally clean use of the same name is simply wrong? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk