Re: wrong implementation of isset()?

On Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:43:29 -0600, Andrei Zmievski wrote: >On Tue, 06 Feb 2001, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> >NULL == not set >> >> Great analysis. What about answering the question? Stanislav Malyshev >> said some months ago this is 'strange', see the discussion around bug >> 6076. Tell us at least, why this actually isn't strange. > >By default, any unset variable has value NULL - and isset(NULL) returns >false to indicate that. Similarly, assigning NULL to a variable unsets >it. But if I declare the variable in my script (and in the namespace), it's existing, no matter which value it has (String, Integer, NULL or whatever). As a result of that, isset() should return true. -Martin