Re: [RFC] array_partition()

I wouldn't be disappointed to see array_partition() added to the language, but the longer I think about it, a well-designed array_group() function could provide the equivalent behavior as well as afford other than just 2 static groups. It seems like the only relevant difference is the fact that array_partition() always returns an indexed array of two arrays without needing to push 2 empty arrays for padding. Theoretically, array_group() might not return any subarrays when there are no qualifying items to retain. Does array_group() need an optional 3rd parameter which declares an empty array for each nominated grouping key which can be nominated in a particular order? Food for thought. Instead of potentially creating array_partition() and eventually array_group(), I feel any benefits of array_partition() should be baked into an array_group() function for greater utility in a unified function. mickmackusa