Hi! > More importantly, there is no other satisfactory solution (except a fatal > error). foreach has no return value, so it has no other way to signal a > failure. If we used a notice or a warning here what would happen is that > code that used generators with an invalid state would, except for the > notice, work as if it had been given an empty iterator. Put another way, > it would fail with only a notice, and continue. That is a far more serious > problem. In other circumstances where we emit warnings, we usually have a > return value the caller can check for error conditions.
I'm not sure I understand why you think behaving as it is an empty iterator and producing an error message is "far more serious problem". Could you explain that? For me, it behaves exactly like any other iterator would behave if you had no more useful elements in it - meaning, producing no elements. I do not understand why you think it requires immediate break of the code flow and abandoning the execution of the current function - after all, for the surrounding code the situation where iterator has no elements is a normal situation for an iterator, and iterating twice is indistinguishable - from the POV of the surrounding code - from iterating an empty iterator once. Moreover, if foreach() was supposed to have any side effects, none of these effects would happen with empty return, so there's no danger here either. So I believe the point that this condition requires immediate exit from the code flow needs some explanation. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
