Re: [DISCUSSION] Make empty() a Variadic

Hi, ""Sebastian B.-Hagensen"" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : CAOjCV8yX7vOHTD1ja2oBDRntDZB0Q1SOYQdyhSaR3vt2vGSS+Q@mail.gmail.com...

2015-02-13 14:45 GMT+01:00 Thomas Punt <tpunt@hotmail.co.uk>:

Hi Francois,

From: francois@tekwire.net> May I suggest to extend your proposal to is_null() with the same logic ?

If we were to do the same with is_null(), then would it not be best to do it with all the is_*() functions? I would be more than happy to cater for those functions as well, though their usages seem a lot less common. What does everyone else think?

While I don't know how common such a usage is I'm certain that there is a use case for it. However, just modifying a subset of the is_* functions sounds like a bad idea. If such a change is applied it should be done to all type related is_* functions and be similar to issets behavior (return false if at least one argument is not of the given type).

I agree, this behaviour should be extended to all the is_* functions if possible.