Hmm I don't seem to have made my position clear. What I mean was, occasionally in data, an empty string and NULL are equivalent. Occasionally, 0 and NULL, or 0 and "" are equivalent. Effectively testing this in Perl is a bit of a pain, and in SQL it's even a lot worse because
SELECT * FROM mytable WHERE foo=foo
will not show the records where foo is null. Purists might say this is how it should be, but I think it's just not very practical.
It'd be nice if you provided a simple means to test if a value is, say, NULL, 0 or "", perhaps using something like in (as in Mysql):
if($foo in (0, "", undef)) ...
I'm actually not even sure that NULL is a valid value for the IN list in Mysql... | [reply]
[d/l]
[select] |
I see what you mean. This is what I provide. Give me your opinion on when I can tweak it, or reasons to change it.
== works on strings and numbers in Verify.
"" == 0, 1 == "1", "2" == 1+1 would all return true.
"a0" == 0 would return false, since a0 is not convertable to a number.
If you refer to a variable that does not exist, the empty string is returned. So doing something like "" == x, where x isn't defined, would return true.
I'm convinced to add isDefined/isNull, similar to perl's defined.
p.s. Thanks for the feedback. Whole point is to get some tweaking in on this before I shoot myself in the foot. :)
| [reply]
[d/l] |