Transaction::getAccountName return type about php-mt940 HOT 6 CLOSED

I feel that changing the return type would be worse than an empty string...

from php-mt940.

The point is that null in indicates a missing value while an empty string
is a valid name.

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 19:11 Robin Speekenbrink [email protected]
wrote:

I feel that changing the return type would be worse than an empty
string...

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#26 (comment).

from php-mt940.

I know blank is an invalid name, and as a setter it would be invalid, but the official mt940 docs (AFAIK) dont mention that a name has a minimum of characters, thus not switching return type has my preference... One might argue about throwing an exception, but thats a different story ;)

from php-mt940.

If mt940 doc don't have a minimum length then blank is valid.. That is why
we need null. Note that null is not a different type; it is not a type at
all

On Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 19:39 Robin Speekenbrink [email protected]
wrote:

I know blank is an invalid name, and as a setter it would be invalid, but
the official mt940 docs (AFAIK) dont mention that a name has a minimum of
characters, thus not switching return type has my preference... One might
argue about throwing an exception, but thats a different story ;)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#26 (comment).

from php-mt940.

null is a special type indeed, thats true... Anyone else have an idea of switching return types ?

from php-mt940.

I still stand by my original point of view that returning NULL in this situation is weird? The return type is a string (it might be empty) but it is / should always be a string...

from php-mt940.