On Tue, 2012-04-10 at 19:12 -0400, Jelle Zijlstra wrote: > I think this is a useful simplification of the language, removing an > unnecessary exception. Would it also make sense to make empty() into a > library function instead of a language construct? That would not > result in > any BC break as far as I can see, but would allow some things that are > currently impossible (e.g., a method called "empty") and further > simplify > the language.
It would, as an empty function would spit notices if the variable doesn't exist (or would have to use references, which would create the variable if it didn't exist already) and therefore destroy the primary use of that construct ... oh and such an empty won't be different from a simple "if" or bool cast. johannes -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
