On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Paul Dragoonis <dragoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Stas,
> >
> >> I like this idea. array_first_key would be nice too
> >>
> >> I am probably missing something, but what those would allow to do that
> >> rewind/end+key() doesn't do?
> >>
> >
> > The big thing that it does that end()+key() doesn't do is really what it
> > doesn't do (update the internal pointer).
> >
> > end() modifies the array pointer. So if you try this in user-land:
> >
> > function array_last_key(array $array) {
> > end($array);
> > return key($array);
> > }
> >
> > It will always force a full copy of the array (at least the hash table).
> > Implementing this as a core function however would eliminate that one
> > side-effect...
>
> and it beats doing $var = null; if(isset($array[0])) { $var = $array[0]; }
>
> Not sure that does the trick(you're pulling values, not keys, and assuming
0-based array), but...
What about reset(array_keys($array)); or end(array_keys($array)); which
only makes copies of the keys?
or even better key(array_slice($array, 0, 1, true)); or
key(array_slice($array,-1,1,true)); which makes a copy of one element of
the array?
I'm of the opinion that we mostly have enough array_* functions, and new
ones have to provide a significant advantage to be accepted. If these
functions are significantly faster than the alternatives, then perhaps they
have merit, but they seem like convenience functions, rather than
fundamentals.
John
