Re: Language constructs and callability

Johannes Schlüter wrote: > So, unfortunately no, language constructs have different semantics which > we can't emulate inside function semantics (well ok, it is software, so > it is thinkable .. but nobody,yet, came up with a robust patch which > doesn't cause maintenance *and* performance penalty) Is there a reason that echo/print couldn't be implemented as functions with some sort of backwards compatibility layer? isset/etc make sense to be language constructs, but I can't think of any reason echo/print need to be. -- Ryan McCue <http://ryanmccue.info/>