On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 4:29 PM Benjamin Morel <benjamin.mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I like the explicitness of the proposal, but only if performance is as good > as (array) cast. One of the reasons we use casting to array in libraries is > not only to access all properties at once, but also because it's fast as > it's implemented as an opcode and not a function call. Would this function > come with its own opcode, like strlen() / gettype() / etc.? > > Ben > Indeed. Besides that, this is a good chance to have an explicit `object` parameter type. @Nikic is the return type also `array`, according to reflection? Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/
