Re: [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties

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